Skip to main content

Full text of "Synonyms of the New Testament: Being the Substance of a Course of Lectures ..."

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 



at |http : //books . google . com/ 



I^IBRARY 

OP THK 



f4 



University of California. 

Mrs. SARAH P. WALSWORTH. 

Received October, 1894. 
^ccessioHs No,^ fSV . dass No. 




^/iv/ /2'7'A 



49 



:^ 



7^u/^/^ 






r 



SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



SYNONYMS 



THE NEW TESTAMENT,; 



THE SUBSTANCE OF A COURSE OP 

LECTURES ADDRESSED TO THE THEOLOGICAL STUDENTS, 

kino's COLLEGE, LONDON. 



RI< HARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D., 

t>ROFE8SOR OF DIVINITY, KING's COLLEGE, LONDON ; 
AUTHOR OP "study OF WOrwDS," ETC. 



ntOU TH> THIBD LONDON EDITION, KBTinD AND BXI.&BCISD. 




RE 


6FIELD, 


84 BEEKMAN STREKT, NEW YORK. 




1857. 




.^^rr- ;-*-"'•■•'•,. 










\ f 


■ . r..:* . . 


*".; , 


£J '• - ' • - ■ 



shijt 



T7 
ISS7 






PREFACE. 



This little volume has grown out of a short 
course of lectures on the synonyms of the New 
Testament, which, in the fulfilment of my duties as 
Professor of Divinity at King's College, I have 
more than once addressed to the theological students 
there. It seemed to me that lectures on such a 
subject might help, in however partial a measure, 
to supply a want, of which many of the students 
themselves are probably conscious, of which those 
who have to do with their training cannot help 
being aware. The long, patient and exact studies 
in philology of bur great schools and universities, 
which form so invaluable a portion of their mental, 
and, I will add, of their moral discipline also, can 
find no place during the two years or two years and 
a half of the theological course at King's College. 
The time itself is too short to allow this, and it is 



PREFACE. 



in great part claimed by other and more pressing 
studies. Some, indeed, we rejoice to find, come to 
lis possessing this knowledge in a very respectable 
degree already; while of others much more than 
this can be said. Yet where it does not already 
exist, it is quite impossible that it can be more than 
in part supplied. At the same time we feel the loss 
and the deficiency ; we are sometimes conscious of 
it even in those who go forth from us with general 
theological acquirements, which would bear a fa- 
vourable comparison with the acquirements of those 
trained in older institutions. It is a matter of re- 
gret, when in papers admirable in all other respects, 
errors of inexact scholarship are to be found, which 
seem quite out of keeping with the amount of in- 
telligence, and the standard of knowledge, which 
every where else they display. 

Feeling the immense value of these studies, and 
how unwise it would be, because we cannot have 
all which we would desire, to forego what is possi- 
ble and within our reach, I have two or three times 
dedicated a brief course of lectures to the compara- 
tive value of words in the New Testament — and 
tliese, with some subsequent additions and some 
defalcations, have supplied the materials of tlie 
present volume. I have never doubted that, set- 
ting aside those higher and more solemn lessons, 
which in a great measure are out of our reach to 



PKEFACE. 7 

impart, being to be taught ratlier by God than men, 
there are few things which we should have more at 
heart than to awaken in our scholars an enthusiasm 
for the grammar and the lexicon. We shall have 
done much, very much for those who come to us 
for theological training and generally for mental 
guidance, if we can persuade them to have these 
continually in their hands ; if we can make them 
believe that with these, and out of these, they may 
be learning more, obtaining more real and lasting 
acquisitions, such as will stay by them, such as will 
form a part of the texture of their own minds for 
ever, that they shall from these be more effectually 
accomplishing themselves for their future work, 
than from many a volume of divinity, studied be- 
fore its time, even if it were worth studying at all, 
crudely digested,(^nd therefore turning to no ti'ue 
nourishment of the inner man.\ 

But having now ventured t6 challenge for these 
lectures a somewhat wider audience than at first 
they had, it may be permitted to me to add here a 
very few observations on the value of the study of 
synonyms, not any longer considered in reference 
to our peculiar needs, but generally ; and on that 
of the synonyms of the New Testament in particu- 
lar ; as also on the helps to this study which are at 
present in existence. 

The value of this study as a discipline for 



') 



8 PREFACE. 

training the mind into close and accurate habits of 
thought, the amount of instruction which may be 
drawn from it, the increase of intellectual wealth 
which it may yield, all this has been implicitly 
recognized by well-nigh all great writers — for well- 
nigh all from time to time have paused, themselves 
to play the dividers and discemers of words — ex- 
plicitly by not a few who have proclaimed the 
value which this study had in their eyes. And in- 
structive as in any language it must be, it must be 
eminently so in the Greek — a language spoken by 

^\ a people of the finest and subtlest intellect ; wlio 

saw distinctions where others saw none ; who di- 

'^ / vided out to different words what others often were 
^ IC content to huddle under a common term ; who were 

'' -v^ themselves singularly alive to its: value, diligently 

. ^ cultivating the art of synonymous distinction,^ and 
*^ sometimes even to an extravagant excess;* who 

- ^" . have bequeathed a multitude of fine and delicate 
"^ "^ I observations on the right distinguishing of their 

^ i, I own words to the after world. 

And while thus, with reference to all Greek, 
the investigation of the likenesses and differences 
of words appears especially invited by the charac- 
teristic excellences of the language, in respect to 

V 

' The hv6fuera iicupur^ Plato, Laehn, 197 d 
• Id. Protag. S11 a b c 



\ 



PEKFACE. 9 

the Greek of the New Testament, plainly there are 
reasons additional inviting us to this study. If by 
it we become aware of delicate variations in an 
author's naeaning, which otherwise we might have 
missed, where is it so desirable that we should not 
miss anything, that we should lose no finer inten- 
tion of the writer, than in those words which are 
the vehicles of the very mind of God ? If it im- 
creases the intellectual riches of the student, can 
this anywhere be of so great importance as there,v 
where the intellectual may, if rightly used, prove 
spiritual riches as well ? If it encourage thoughtful 
meditation on the exact forces of words, both as 
they are in themselves, and in their relation to other 
words, or in any way unveil to us their marvel and 
their mystery, this can nowhere else have a worth 
in the least approaching that which it acquires 
when the words with which we have to do are, to 
those who receive tliem aright, words of eternal 
life ; while out of the dead carcases of the same, if 
men suffer the spirit of life to depart from them, all 
manner of corruptions and heresies may be, as they 
have been, bred. 

The words of the New Testament are eminently 

the crroiyfia of Christian theology, and he who will 

lot begin with a patient study of these, shall never 

make anj considerable, least of all any secure, ad 

vances in this : for here, as everywhere else, disap • 

1* \ * '" . 



10 PREFACE. 

pointment awaits him who thinks to possess the 
whole without first possessing the parts, of which 
that whole is composed. Now it is the very nature 
and necessity of the investigation of synonyms to 
compel such patient investigation of the forces of 
words, such accurate weighing of their precise 
value, absolute and relative, and in this its merits 
as a mental discipline, consist. 

Yet neither in respect of Greek synonyms in 
general, nor specially in respect of those of the 
New Testament, can it be affirmed that we are even 
tolerably furnished with books. Whatever there 
may be to provoke occasional dissent in Doderlein's 
Lateinische Synonyme vmd Eiymologieen^ yet there 
is no book on Greek synonyms which for compass 
and completeness can bear comparison with it ; and 
almost all the more important modem languages 
of Europe have better books devoted to their syno- 
nyms than any which has been devoted to the 
Greek. The works of the early grammarians, as of 
Ammonius and others, supply a certain amount of 
important material, but cannot be said even remote- 
ly to meet the needs of the student at the present 
day. Vomel's SynonymiscJies Worterhichy Frank- 
furt, 1822, an admirable little volume as far as it 
goes, but at the same time a school-book and no 
more, and Pillon's Synonymea Chreca^ of which a 
translation into English was edited by the late 



PREFACE. 11 

T. K. Arnold, London, 1850, are the only modem 
attempts to supply the deficiency; at least I am 
not aware of any other. But neither of these wri- 
ters has allowed himself space to enter on his sub- 
ject with any fulness and completeness ; while the 
references to the synonyms of the New Testament 
are exceedingly rare in Vomel ; and though some- 
what more frequent in Pillon's work, wre capricious 
and accidental there, and in general of a meagre 
and unsatisfactory description. 

The only book dedicated expressly and exclu- 
8ively*to these is one written in Latin by J. A. H. 
Tittman, De Synonymia in Ifovo Teatamento^ Leip- 
sic, 1829, 1832. It would ill become me, and I 
have certainly no intention to speak slightingly of 
the work of a most estimable man, and of a good 
scholar — above all, when that work is one from 
which I have occasionally derived assistance, such 
as I most willingly acknowledge. Yet the fact 
that we are offering a book on the same subject as 
a preceding author ; and may thus lie under, or seem 
to others to lie under, the temptation of unduly 
claiming for the ground which we would occupy, 
that it is not occupied already ; this must not wholly 
shut our mouths in respect of what appear to us 
deficiencies or shortcomings on his part. And this 
work of Tittmann's seems to me still to leave room 
for another on the subject of the synonyms of the 



12 PKKFACK. 

New Testament. It sometimes travels very slowly 
over its ground ; the syaonyms which he selects for 
discrimination cannot be esteemed always the most 
interesting, nor, which is one of the most important 
things of all, are they always felicitously grouped 
for investigation ; he often fails to bring out in sharp 
and clear antithesis the differences between them ; 
while now and then the investigations of later 
scholar* have quite broken down the distinctions 
which he has sought to establish. Indeed the fact 
that this book of Tittmann's, despite the interest 
of its subject, and its standing alone upon it, not 
to speak of its republication in England and in 
English,' has never obtained any considerable cir- 
culation among students of theology here, is itself 
an evidence that it has not been felt to meet our 
wants on the matter. 

The work which is now offered, is, I am perfect- 
ly aware, but a slight contribution to the subject — 
small in respect of the number of synonyms con- 
sidered,' which might easily have been doubled or 

^'Biblical Cabinet, vols. iii. xxxvii. Edioburgh, 1883, ISSY. It 
must at the same time be owned that Tittmann has hardly had a 
fair chance. Nothing can weU be imagined more incorrect and 
more slovenly than this translation. It is often unintelligible, 
where the original is perfectly clear. 

' I have not thought it worth while to dispose these synoD3rma 
in alphabetical order. The fact that only one in each pair or groups 



PREFACE. 13 

trebled ; many of the most interesting having re- 
mained untouched by me ; and also, as I am pain- 
fully aware, with manifold deficiencies, most proba- 
bly with softie mistakes, even in the treatment of 
these. The conclusions at which I have arrived 
may rest sometimes on too narrow an induction : it 
is possible that a larger knowledge would have com- 
pelled me to modify or forego them altogether. I 
can only say that I have not consciously passed 
over any passages which would have made against 
my distinction ; and that on this and any other sub- 
ject in the volume I shall most gladly receive in- 
struction and correction ; while yet, in conclusion, 
I will not fear to add that, with all this, the book is 
the result of enough of honest labour, of notices 
not to be found ready to hand in Wetstein, or Gro- 
tius, or Suicer, in German commentaries, or in lexi- 
cons (though I have availed myself of all these), 
but gathered one by one during many years, to 
make me feel confident that any who shall hereafter 
give a better and completer book on the subject, 
will yet acknowledge a certain amount of assistance 
derived from these preparatory labours. 

Let me only add how deeply thankful I shall 

can be arranged according to such law, renders the disposition 
nearly, if not altogether, useless. On the other hand, I have 
sought, by sufficient indexes, to assist the reader's references to the 
book. 



14 PREFACE. 

be to Him who can alone prosper the work of our 
hands, if my book, notwithstanding its deficiencies 
and imperfections, shall be of any service to any in 
leading them into a closer and more accurate inves- 
tigation of His Word, and of the riches of wisdom 
and knowledge which are therein contained. 

Itobenstqke, McKy^ 1854. 



CONTENTS. 



g i. — *ZKi€\ifi<ria, trwayttyfi, iraviiyvpit .... 17 

ii. — B€t6nr7jSf OfSrfis , , 24 

i\L—'Up6y, yaSs •••...,, 28 

iv- — i^irifiduty i\4yxu (oir/o, ^Aryxoj) . . . 81 

V. — iufdBrifia, iiyddefxa 35 

"vi. — Tpo<pvirt66f, fiavre^o/jicu ..... 40 

vii — Ttfjmplct, K6\aats 45 

viiL — it\7i6'fiSy a\i^iv6s 43 

ix. — 0§pdir»yy 8ovAof, Siciicoyor, imiprrris .... 68 

X. — 5c(A(a, <f>6fioSf 9v\dfi€ta 5g 

xi. — Kcucla, xoyripia, KOKO-fiBeia 60 

xii — kyavdoitf <l>t\4(a 55 

xiiL — $d\cur(ra, ir4\ayos . . , ... . . 72 

xiv. — <rK\7ip6Sf ah<rrt\p6s 74 

XV. — ctjcc^y, diioiuffis, 6/xoi»/jia 77 

xvi. — kffonloif curiKyeia 88 

xvii. — BtyydvoDf &wrofi€u, i|o}\a^» . . . . .89 

xviiL — ira\tyyev€ffleif iyaKaiyaxris . . . . » 92 

xix. — alffx^yri* a*5<i>s ....... 98 

XX. — cuHt&Sf aoKf>po<r6yri ...... 102 

xxi. — aripoft k\K6u 106 

xxii. — 6\6K\fipos, r4\tios 108 

xxiii — (Tr4<f>ayoSf didSri/jia 112 

xxiv. — ir\§oyt^la, <l>i\apyvpla 117 

XXV. — fi6<rK»f xoifiaivM 120 

xxvi — Cn^h <f>B6yos 124 



16 C50NTBNTS. 

• 

PA«B 

§xxvu.— C«»^, iSroj 128 

xxviiL — Kiptos, dt(rir6rris 184 

zxix — a\a(<&v, vxtp/fypaofoSt iflpiffrfis 187 

XXX. — ityrlxpKffos, tf'eu5(JxP*<''Tos 146 

xxxL — fjLoX^yot, fitahu 151 

xxxiL — rat^elot vouOetrta 152 

xxxiii. — li(l>€(rts, irdpuris 15Y 

xxxiv. — fxwpoXoyia, cutrxpoXoyla, 9UTp«w€\la . . . 162 

XXXV. — \aTp€6a>, \tirovpyew 171 

xxxvL — repriif xrwx^s 1*75 

xxxvii. — BvixSs, opyh, mpopyiafUt 178 

xxxviil — llXaioVt fi^pov ixp'^^^t iAc/^w) . . , , 182 

xxxix. — *Y.^paio% *Iov9aTo(, ^IfrpaiiKlrris .... 185 

xL — alr4<a, ipwrd» 194 

xlL — kyiTcoLvaiSt &v(ais .198 

xlii. — rairtivo<ppo<r{nrHi irpa&TUt . . . • • 201 

xliii — vpaSTTis, iwieUeia . 207 

xliv. — K\4irrris, \ri<rr'fis 211 

xlv. — ic\^yUf plirrUf \o6ot * 215 

xlvL — (pus, <p4yyosy <pw(rr'fipf X^xvosy \oiti,wds . . • 219 

xlvii. — ^x*^'s» ^^«o* 225 

xlyiii.-7-deo(rciB^f, tvatP'tiSt titXafiiis, OpTJffKos, 9§un9aifmp . 227 

x]ix. — KKrifAo, K\dSo^ 287 

L — o. XP^^"^^^* i,yaBo9<rvpri • . . . . 288 

fi, iXiris, iriarrti ...... 289 

y, ffxy^ct, aXp§<ris ...... 289 

8. fULKpoBvixiOf xpa6nis 240 

e. \ot9op46»f fi\eur<lirifJi,4o> 240 

C y^fvxiicSSi aapKiK6s 240 

1}. fA€rca^o4w, fitra/A^KofMU 241 

0. ald^yt K6a-fios 241 

1. irpatst riff^x^os 242 

K. 0tniir6ff y€Kp6s ....... 242 

X. KSXaffiSt rifimpia 242 

Appendix 248 






SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



§1. — ^EKKkrjaia^ fjvva^ai^r]^ iravijyvpt^, 

'EKKkrjaia is one of those words whose history- 
it is peculiarly interesting to watch, as they obtain 
a deeper meaning, and receive a new consecration 
in the Christian Church ; which, even while it did 
not invent, has yet assumed them into its service, 
and employed them in a far loftier sense than any 
to which the world had ever put them before. 
The very word by which the Church is named is 
itself an example — a more illustrious one could 
scarcely be found — of this gradual ennobling of a 
word. For we have iscKKijaia in three distinct 
stages of meaning — the heathen, the Jewish, and 
the Christian. In respect of the first, ifc/cKrjaici, 
as all know, was the lawful assembly in a free 
Greek city of all those possessed of the rights of 



18 SYNONYMS OF THE 

citizenship, for tlie transaction of public affairs 
That they were surrmwned is expressed in the latter 
part of the word ; that they were summoned out 
of the whole population, a select portion of it, in- 
cluding neither the populace, nor yet strangers, nor 
those who had forfeited their civic rights, tliis is 
expressed in the first. Both the calling^ and the 
calling ovt^ are moments to be remembered, when 
the word is assumed into a higher Christian sense, 
for in them the chief part of its peculiar adaptation 
to its auguster uses lies.* It is interesting to ob- 
serve how, on one occasion in the !N"ew Testament, 
the word returns to this its earlier significance 
(Acts xix. 32, 39, 40). 

^EKKkria-ia did not, like some other words, pass 
immediately' and at a single step from the heathen 
world to the Christian Church: but here, as so 

' Both these points are weU made by Flacius Illyricus, in his 
ClavU ScripturcBj s. v. Ecclesia : Quia Ecclesia a verbo KoXtiv venit, 
hoc observetur primum ; ideo conversioneni hominum yocationem 
vooari, non tantum quia Deus eos per se suumque Yerbum, qua^ 
clamore, vocat; sed etiam quia sicut herus ex turb& famulorum 
certos aliquos ad aliqua singularia munia evocat, sic Deus quoque 
turn totum populum suuta vpcat ad cultum suum (Hos. xi. 1) turn 
etiam singulos homines ad certas singularesque functiones. (Act. 
xiiL 2.) Quoniam autcm non tantum vocatur Populus Dei ad cul- 
tum Dei, sed etiam vocatur ex reliqud, turb& aut confusione generis 
humani, ideo dicitur Ecclesia, quasi dieas, Evocata divinitus ex reli- 
qua. impiorum coUuvie, ad cultum celebrationemque Dei, ft aeter- 
nam felicitatem. 



NEW TESTAMENT. . 19 

often, the Septuagint supplies the link of connexion, 
the point of transition, the word being there pre- 
pared for its highest meaning of all. When the 
Alexandrian translators undertook the rendering of 
the Hebrew Scriptures, they found in them two 
constantly recurring words, namely >t;? and ing. 
For these they employed generally, and as their 
most adequate Greek equivalents, awa^tof^r] and 
eKKKTiaia. The rule which they seem to have pre- 
scribed to themselves is as follows — to render ittj 
for the most part by crwaywyi; (Exod. xii. 3 ; Lev. 
iv. 13 ; Numb. i. 2, and altogether more than an 
hundred times), and whatever other renderings of 
the word they may adopt, in no single case to ren- 
der it by ifCfcKfjaia. It were to be wished that they 
had shown the same consistency in respect of hnp ; 
but they have not ; for while eKKkqaia is their stand- 
ing word for it (Deut. xviii. 16 ; Judg. xx. 2 ; 1 Eangs 
viii. 14, and in all some seventy times), they too 
often render this also by awa^wyrj (Lev, iv. 13 ; 
Nnmb. x. 4 ; Deut. v. 22, and in all some five and 
twenty times), thus breaking down for the Greek 
reader the distinction which undoubtedly exists be- 
tween the words. Our English translation has the 
same lack of a consistent rendering. Its two words 
are ^ congre^tion ' and ^ assembly ; ' but instead of 
constantly assigning one to one, and one to the 
other, it renders nn3> now by * congregation ' (Lev. 



fYNONTMS OF THE 



X. 17 ; Numb. i. 16 ; Josh. ix. 27), and now by ' as- 
sembly ' (Lev. iv. 13) ; and on the other hand, hnp 
only sometimes by 'assembly' (Judg. xxi. 8; 2 
Chron. xxx. 23), but much oftener by ' congrega- 
tion ' (Judg. xxi. 5 ; Josh. viii. 35). There is an 
interesting discussion by Vitringa {De Synag, Yet. 
pp. 77 — 89) on the distinction between these two 
Hebrew synonyms ; the result of which is summed 
up in the following statements : Notat proprie iihp 
universam alicujus populi multitudinem, vinculis 
societatis unitam et rempublicam sive civitatem 
quandam constituentem, cum vocabulum rn^ ex 
indole et vi significationis suae tantum dicat quem- 
cunque hominum coetum et conventum, sive mino- 
rem sive majorem (p. 80). And again : Jwaywy?;, 
irt et ma>5 semper significat coetum conjunctum et 
congregatum, etiamsi nuUo forte vinculo ligatum, 
sed i] eKKkriaia [= btip] designat multitudinem ali- 
quam, quae populum copstituit, per leges et vincula 
inter se junctam, etsi s«pe fiat ut non sit coacta vel 
cogi possit (p. 88). 

Accepting this as a true distinction, remember- 
ing too the probable etymological connexion be- 
tween bnp and the Greek tcaXeiv^ and thus its rela- 
tionship, once removed, with iKKKrjtrla^ as indeed 
also with the old Latin * calare,' and our own ' call,' 
we shall see that it was not without due reason 
that our Lord (Matt. xvi. 18 ; xviii. 17) and His 



NEW TESTAMENT. 21 

Apostles claimed this, as the nobler word, to desig- 
nate the new society of which He was the Founder, 
being, as it was, a society knit together by the 
closest spiritual bonds, and altogether independent 
of space. 

Yet for all this we do not find the title iKKXtfaia 
altogether withdrawn from the Jewish congrega- 
tion ; that too was " the Church in the wilderness" 
(Acts vii. 38) ; for Christian and Jewish differed 
only in degree, and not in kind. Nor yet do we 
find awarfwr^ri wholly renounced by the Church ; 
the latest honourable use of it in the New Testa- 
ment, indeed the only Christian use of it there, is 
by that Apostle, to whom it was especially given to 
maintain unbroken to the latest possible moment 
the outward bonds connecting the Synagogue and 
the Church (Jam. ii. 2). Occasionally also by the 
early Fathers, by Ignatius for instance {Ep, ad 
JPolyc. 4), we find awar^oDyri still employed as an 
honourable designation of the Church, or of her 
places of assembly. Still there were causes at 
work, which could not but induce the faithful to 
have less and less pleasure in the application of this 
name to themselves ; which led them in the end to 
leave it altogether to those, whom in the latest book 
of the canon the Lord had characterized for their 
fierce opposition to the truth even as " the syna- 
gogue of Satan" (Rev. iii. 9). Thus the greater 



22 SYNONYMS OP THE 

fitness and nobleness of the title iK/cXrjaia has been 
already noted. Add to this that the Church was 
ever rooting itself more predominantly in the soil 
of heathendom, breaking off more entirely from its 
Jewish stock and stem. This of itself would have 
led the faithful to the letting fall of awaytayi], a 
word at once of unfrequent use in classical Greek, 
and permanently associated with Jewish worship, 
and to the ever more exclusive appropriation to 
themselves of i/c/ckrfauij so familiar already, and of 
so honourable a significance, in Greek ears. 

It will be perceived from what has been said, 
that Augustine, by a piece of good fortune which 
he had scarcely a right to expect, was only half in 
the wrong, when transferring his Latin etymologies 
to the Greek and Hebrew, and not pausing to ask 
himself whether they would hold good there, as was 
beforehand improbable enough, he finds the reason 
for attributing avpaytoyt] to the Jewish, and iKKkfj- 
aia to the Christian Church, in the fact that ' con- 
vocatio ' (== i/cKXrjaia) is a nobler term than * con- 
gregatio ' (=" awayayyij)^ the first being properly 
the callmg together of men^ the second the gather- 
ing together {congregation from congrego^ and that 
from greoi) of cattle,^ 

' Enarr. in Ps. Ixxxi. 1. In synagogft, popnlum Isradl accipi- 
mus, quia et ipsorum proprie sjnagoga dici solet, quamvis et £o- 
t^^dsia dicta sit Nostri vero Ecclesiam nunquain Bynagogam dixe- 



NKW TESTAMENT. 23 

The iravfjyvpi^ differs from the eK/cKfjaia in this, 
that in the iKKkr^aia, as has been noted already, 
there lay ever the sense of an assembly that had 
tome together for the transaction of business. The 
iravriyvpi^^ on the other hand, was a great assembly 
for purposes of festal rejoicing ; and on this account 
it is found joined continually with eo/or^, as by 
Philo, Vit Mo8, ii. 7 ; Ezek. xlvi. 11 ; cf. Hos. ii. 
11 ; ix. 5 ; the word having given us ' panegyric,' 
which is properly a speech made on such an occa- 
sion. Business might grow out of the fact that 
such multitudes were assembled, since many, and 
for various reasons, would be glad to avail them- 
selves of the circumstance ; but only in the same 
way as a 'fair' grew, out of a 'feria,' or holy-day, 
Strabo (x. 5) notices the business-like aspect which 
the 'n'avrfyvp€i<: commonly assumed : ^ re 7rav^yvpc<: 
ifiiropiKov Tt irpayfia : cf. Pausanias, x. 32. 9 ; and 
this was to such an extent the prominent character 
of them, that the Romans translated iravijyvpis by 
the Latin 'mercatus,' and this even when the 

runt, sed semper Ecclesiam: sive discernendi caussA, sive quod 
inter congregationem, unde synagoga, et convocationem, unde Ec- 
clesia nomen accepit, distet aliquid ; quod scilicet eongregari et 
pecora solent, atque ipsa proprie, quorum et greges proprie dici- 
mus; eonvocari autem magis est utentium ratione, sicut sunt homi- 
nes. So also the author of a Commentary on the Book of Proverhfl 
formerly ascribed to Jerome {Opp, vol. v. p. 633). 



24r SYNONYMS OF THE 

Olympic games were intended (Cicero, Tu8€. v. 3 ; 
Justin, xiii. 5). These with the other games were 
eminently, though not exclusively, the iravfjyvpei^ 
of the Greek nation (Thucyd. i. 25). If we keep 
this festal character of the iravijyvpcf; in mind, we 
shall lind a peculiar fitness in the employment of 
this word at Heb. xii. 23 ; where only in the New 
Testament it occurs. The Apostle is there setting 
forth the communion of the Church militant on 
earth with the Church triumphant in heaven,— 
with that Church from which all labour and toil have 
for ever passed away (Eev. xxi. 4) ; and how could 
he better describe this last than as a iravnyvpi^j than 
as the festal assembly of heaven ? 



§ ii. — 0€v6Tf)<;, OeoTTj^, 

NEirHBR of these words occurs more than once 
in the New Testament : 0€l6t7}<; only at Rom. i. 20 ; 
deoTTf^ at Ool. ii. 9. We have rendered both by 
^ Godhead ; ' yet they must not be regarded as iden- 
tical in meaning, nor even as two different forms 
of the same word, which in process of time have 
separated off from one another, and acquired differ- 
ent shades of significance. On the contrary, there 
is a real distinction between them, and one which 



NEW TESTAMENT. 25 

grounds itself on their diflFerent derivations ; Oeortft 
being from ©eo9, and ^eton;?, not from to deiwy 
which might be said to be the same thing as ©coy, 
but from the adjective dew. Comparing the two 
passages where they severally occur, we shall at 
once perceive the fitness of the employment of one 
word in one, of the other in the other. In the first 
(Eom. i. 20), St. Paul is declaring how much of 
God may be known from the revelation of Himself 
which He has made in nature, from those vestiges 
of Himself which men may everywhere trace in 
the world around them. Yet it is not the personal 
God whom any man may learn ta know by these 
aids ; He can be known only by the revelation of 
Himself in His Son ; but only His divine attributes, 
His majesty and glory. This Theophylact feels, 
who gives fieyaKeiortf^ as equivalent to Oetonj^ here; 
and it is not to be doubted that St. Paul uses this 
vaguer, more abstract, and less personal word, just 
because he would aflSrm that mca may know God's 
power and majesty from Hi& works ; but would not 
imply that they may know Himself from these or 
from anything short of the revelationoif His Eter- 
nal Word.* But in the second passage (Col. ii. 9), 
St. Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells 
all the ftdness of absolute Godhead ; they were no 

^ Cicero {Tmc, L 13): Multi de Biis prava sentiuiit; omnM 
tamen esse vim et naturam diyinam arbitrantur. 
2 



26 8YNONY2tf8 OF THE 

mere rays of divine glory which gilded Him, light- 
ing up His person for a season and with a splendour 
not His own ; but He was, and is, absolute and 
perfect God ; and the Apostle uses Oeorr]^ to express 
this essential and personal Godhead of the Son. 
Thus Beza rightly : Won dicit : ttjv ^etonrra, i. e. 
divinitatem, sed Tr)v BeoTqray i. e. deitatem, ut ma- 
gis etiam expresse loquatur ; . . . ^ detoTr)^ attributa 
videtur potius quam naturam ipsam declarare. And 
Bengel : Non modo divinse virtutes, sed ipsa divina 
natura. De Wette has sought to express the dis- 
tinction in his German translation, rendering OetoTrf^ 
by * Gottlichkeit,' and Beorrt^ by ' Gottheit.' 

There have not been wanting those who have 
denied that any such distinction was intended by 
St Paul ; and they rest this denial on the assump- 
tion that no such diflference between the forces of 
the two words can be satisfactorily made out. Bu. 
even supposing that it did not appear in classic 
Greek, this of itself would be in no way decisive 
on the matter. The Gospel of Christ might for all 
this put into words, and again draw out from them, 
new forces, latent distinctions which those who hith- 
erto employed the words may not have required, 
but which were necessary for it. And that this 
distinction between * deity ' and ' divinity,' if I may 
use these words to represent severally ^con;? and 
^€407179, is one which would be strongly felt, and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 27 

wiiich therefore would seek its utterance in CBiris- 
tian theology ; of this we have signal proof in the 
fact that the Latin Christian writers were not con- 
tent with * divinitas,' which they found ready to 
their hand in the writings of Cicero and of others ; 
but themselves coined ^ deitas ' as the only adequate 
Latin representative of the Greek deorrj^;. We have 
Augustine's express testimony to the fact {De Cm, 
De% vii. 1) : Hanc divinitatem^ vel ut sic dixerim 
ddtaiem ; nam et hoc verbo uti jam nostros non 
piget, ut de Grseco expressius transferant id quod 
iUi dii}TtYTa appellant, &c. Cf. x. 1, 2. But not to 
urge this nor yet the several etymologies of the 
words, which so clearly point to this difference in 
their meanings, examples, so far as they extend, go 
to support the same. Both B^otvi^ and ^etoriy?, as in 
general the abstract words in every language, are 
of late formation ; and one of them, Beortf^ is ex- 
tremely rare ; indeed only a single example of it 
from classical Greek has yet been brought forward 
(Lucian, loarom. 9) ; where, however, it expresses, 
in agreement with the view hero aflSrmed, Godhead 
in the absolute sense, or at least in as al)^olute a* 
sense as the heathen could conceive it. ©etoriy? is 
a very much commoner word ; and all the instances 
of its employment with which I am acquainted also 
bear out the distinction which has been here drawn. 
There is evtr a manifestation of the divine, there 



28 SYNONTIIS OF THE 

are divine attributes, in that to whicli OeUrrq^ is at- 
tributed, but never absolute personal Deiiy. Thus 
Lucian, {De Calimi. 17), attributes deioups to He- 
phsestion, when after his death Alexander would 
have raised him to the rank of a god ; and Plutarch 
speaks of the Oetorrj^ 7^9 '^1^9 {De JPlac. Phil, v. 
1 ; cf. De Isid. et Osi/r. 2 ; Svll. 6), with various 
other passages to the like effect. In conclusion, it 
may be observed, that whether this distinction was 
intended, as I am fully persuaded it was, by St. 
Paul or not, it established itself firmly in the later 
theological language of the Church — the Greek 
Fathers using never deiorr)^^ but always deorrj^^ as 
alone adequately expressing the essential Godhead 
of each of the Three Persons in the Trinity. 



§ iii. — lepov, vao^. 

We have only in our Version the one word 
^ temple,' with which we render both of these ; nor 
is it very easy to perceive in what manner we could 
have indicated the distinction between them ; which 
is yet a very real one, and one the marking of which 
would often add much to the clearness and preci- 
sion of the sacred narrative. ^lepov is the whole 
compass of the sacred enclosure, the rifieiWy in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 29 

eluding the outer courts, the porches, porticoes, and 
other buildings subordinated to the temple itself. 
NaMj on the other hand, from i/ato), ' habito,' the 
proper habitation of God, is the temple itself, that 
properly and by especial right so called, being the 
heart and centre of the whole ; the Holy and the 
Holy of Holies. This distinction, one that existed 
and was recognized in profane Greek and with 
reference to heathen temples, quite as much as in 
sacred Greek and with relation to the temple of the 
true God (see Herodotus, i. 181, 183), is one, I be- 
lieve, always assumed in all passages relating to 
the temple at Jerusalem, alike by Josephus, by 
Philo, by the Septuagint translators, and in the 
New Testament. Often indeed it is explicitly 
recognized, as by Josephus, {AnU. viii. 3. 9), who, 
having described the building of the 1^069 by Solo 
men, goes cm to say ; NaoO £' e^todev Upbv ^tcoSofirj' 
aev hf rerpcbydi^ oxijfiaTt. In another passage 
{Antt. xi. 4. 3), he describes the Samaritans as seek- 
ing permission of the Jews to be allowed to share 
in the rebuilding of God's house {ovyKaraaKeudaat 
Tov va6v). This is reftised them (cf. Ezra iv. 2) ; 
but, according to his account, it was permitted to 
them a<l>ucvovfjLAfoi^ ek to iepov ai/3etv tov Geov — 
a privilege denied to mere Gentiles, who might not, 
under penalty of death, pass beyond their own 
Court (Acts xxi. 29, 30). 



W SYITONYMS OF THE. 

The distinction may be brought to bear with 
advantage on several passages in the New Testa- 
ment. When Zacharias entered into ^^ the Umfple 
of the Lord " to bum incense, the people who wait- 
ed his return, and who are described as standing 
" without " (Luke i. 10), were in one sense in the 
temple too, that is the lepov^ while he alone entered 
into the ^009, the ' temple ' in its more limited and 
auguster sense. We read continually of Christ 
teaching ^ in the temple ' (Matt xxvi. 55 ; Luke jxL 
37 ; John viii. 20) ; and perhaps are at a loss to 
understand how this could have been so ; or how 
long conversations could there have been maintain- 
ed, without interrupting the service of God. But 
this is ever the iepov^ the porches and porticoes of 
which were eminently adapted to such purposes, 
as they were intended for them. So too the money 
changers, the buyers and sellers, with the sheep 
and oxen whom the Lord drives out, He repela 
them from the Upov^ and not from the vad^. Lreve- 
rent as was their intrusion, they yet had not dared 
to establish themselves in the temple properly so 
called (Matt. xxi. 23 ; John ii. 14). On the other 
hand, when "w^ read of another Zacharias slain 
" between the temple and the altar " (Matt, xxiii. 
35), we have only to remember that ' temple ' is 
1/009 here, at once to get rid of a diflSculty, which 
may perhaps have presented itself to many — ^this, 



"StEW TEBTAMKNT. 81 

namelj, Was not the altar in the temple? how 
then could any locality be described as between 
these two ? In the Upop^ doubtless, the brazen altar 
to which allusion is here made was, but not in the 
WW9, " in the court of the house of the Lord " (cf. 
Josephus, Antt. viii. 4. 1), where the sacred histo- 
rian (2 Chron. xxiv. 21) lays the scene of this mur- 
der, but not in the house of the Lord, or vuo^ itsel£ 
Again, how vividly does it set forth to us the 
dei^air and defiance of Judas, that he presses even 
into the va6^ (Matt, xxvii. 6), into that which was 
set apart for the priests alone, and there casts down 
before them the accursed price of blood ! Those 
expositors who affirm that here wio9 stands for lepoPj 
should adduce some other passage in which the one 
is put for the other. 



§ iv. — eiriTifida}, eKeyx^* {ahia, SXeyxo^.) 

One may * rebuke' another without bringing 
the rebuked to a conviction of any fiiult on his 
part ; and this, either because there was none, and 
the rebuke was therefore unneeded or unjust ; or 
else because, though there was such fault, the re- 
buke was ineffectual to bring the offender to own 
it ; and in this possibility of ^ rebuking ' for sin, 



38 STKOKTMB OF THE 

without * convincing' of sin, lies the distinction be- 
tween these two words. In hrtnfiav lies simply the 
notion of rebuking ; which word can therefore be 
ufied of one unjustly checking or blaming another ; 
in this sense Peter * rebuked ' Jesus {^p^aro ctt^t.- 
/AOF, Matt. xvi. 22 ; cf. xix. 13 ; Luke xviii. 39) : 
— or ineflfectually and without any profit to the 
person rebuked, who is not therefore made to see 
his sin ; as when the penitent thief * rebuked ' 
{(hrerlfm) his fellow malefactor (Luke xxiii. 40 ; c£ 
Mark ix. 25). But eX^y^e^v is a much more preg- 
nant word ; it is so to rebuke another, with such 
effectual wielding of the victorious lums of the 
truth, as to bring him, I do not say to a confession, 
but to a conviction, of his sin ; just as in juristic 
Greek, it is not merely to reply to, but to refute, aj^ 
opponent. 

When we keep this distinction well in mind, 
what a light does it throw on a multitude of pas- 
sages in the New Testament ; and how much deep- 
er a meaning does it give them. Thus our Lord 
could demand, " Which of you convinceth {ikeyx^t) 
Me of sin?" (John viii. 46.) Numbers rebuked 
Him ; numbers laid sin to His charge (Matt. ix. 3 ; 
John ix. 16) ; but none brought sin home to His 
conscience. Other passages which will gain from 
realizing the fulness of the meaning of eXeyxeti^, are 
John iii. 20 ; viii. 9 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 24, 25 ; but above 



NEW TESTAMENT. 33 

all, the great passage, John xvi. 8: "When He 
[the Comforter] is come, He will reprove the world 
of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment ;" so 
we have rendered the words, following in our * re- 
prove ' the Latin * arguet ; ' although few, I think, 
that have in any degree sought to sound the depth 
of our Lord's words, but will admit that * convince,' 
which unfortunately our translators have relegated 
to the margin, would have been the preferable ren- 
dering, giving a depth and fulness of meaning to 
this work of the Holy Ghost, which * reprove ' in 
some part fails to express.* "He who shall come 
in my room, shall so bring home to the world its 
own * sin,' my perfect ' righteousness,' God's coming 
* judgment,' shall so * convince' it of these, that it 
shall be obliged itself to acknowledge them ; and 
in this acknowledgment may find, shall be in the 
right way, to find, its own blessedness and salva- 
tion." 

Between alrLa and ekeyxo^ a difference of a 
similar character exists. Alria is an accusation, but 
whether false or true the word does not attempt to 

' Lampe gtree exceUently t^eU the force of this 4\4ylu : Opus 
Doctoris, qui Teritatem qua baetenus con est agnita ita ad con- 
Bcientiam etiam renitentis demonstrat, ut Tictas dare manus coga- 
tnr. See an admirable discussion on the word, especially as here 
used, in Archdeacon Hare's Mission of the Comforter^ 1st edit. pp. 
628—544. 

2* 



34 SYNONYMS OF THE 

anticipate ; and thus it could be applied, indeed it 
was applied to the accusation made against the Lord 
of Glory Himself (Matt, xxvii. 37); but eXeyxos 
implies not merely the charge, but the truth of the 
charge, and the manifestation of the truth; nay 
more than this, very often also the acknowledgment, 
if not outward, yet inward, of the truth of the 
charge on the side of the party accused ; it being 
the glorious prerogative of the truth in its highest 
operation not merely to assert itself; and to silence 
the adversary, but to silence him by convincing him 
of his error. Demosthenes, Con. Androt p. 600 : 
Tldfiirokv \otBopia re koI alria /c€')((opL<rfiivov iarlv 
iXiyXpv, alria /jlcp yap iarcv, orav rt? '^CK^ XP^^^' 
fievo<i \6yfp fii] nrapda'xrjrai TricTiVy &v \iyei' ekeyxo^ 
Se, orav &v &v elTrrf ta9, koI raXrjdh ofiov Bei^. 
Compare Aristotle, Hhet ad Alex. 13 : *'EX€7%o9 
ecrn /JL€V h firj Swarbv aXKa><; €)(€W aXX' ovtod^, coy 
i^fieU Xiyofiev. By our serviceable distinction be- 
tween ^ convict ' and ' convince ' we maintain a dif- 
ference between the judicial and the moral SXeyxp^. 
Both will meet together in the last day, when every 
condemned sinner will be at once ' convicted ' and 
' convinced ;' all which is implied in that "he was 
speechless" of the guest who was found by the 
king without a marriage garment (Matt. xxii. 12 ; 
c£ Kom. iii. 4). 



KEW TfiSTAHSNT. 35 



Majstt would deny that there is any room foi 
eynonymous discrimination in respect of these two 
words, aflirming them to be merely diflferent spell- 
ings of the same word, and promiscuously used ; 
which if it were the fact, their fitness for a place in 
a book of synonyms would of course disappear; 
difference as well as likeness being necessary fcwr 
this. This much, indeed, of what they aflSrm is 
perfectly true — namely, that aifa&rjfia and dvdOefiOj 
like evfyqfia and evpefm, hrldTjfia and hridefiOj must 
severally be regarded as having been at first only 
different pronunciations, which issued in different 
spellings, of one and the same word. But it is cer- 
tain that nothing is more common than for slightly 
different orthographies of the same word finally to 
settle and resolve themselves into different words, 
with different provinces of meaning which they 
have severally appropriated to themselves; and 
which henceforth they maintain in perfect inde- 
pendence one of the other. I have elsewhere given 
a considerable number of examples of the kind ; 
and a very few may here suffice : Opaaof; and Odpao^y 
'Thrax' and <Threx,' 'rechtlich' and 'redlich,' 
^ hamais ' and ^ hamois,' * allay ' and ^ ^loy.' That 



36 SYNONYMS OF THE 

which may be affirmed of all tliese, may also, I am 
persuaded, be affirmed in respect of avddrjfm and 
dvddefia. Whether this were so or not was a ques- 
tion debated with no little heat by some of the 
great early Hellenists, and names of weight and 
importance are ranged on either side; Salmasius 
bdng the greatest name among those who main- 
tained the existence of a distinction, at least in 
Hellenistic Greek ; Beza among those who denied 
it. Perhaps here, as in so many cases, the truth 
did not absolutely lie with the combatants on either 
part, but lay rather between them, though much 
nearer to one part than the otlaer; the most reason- 
able conclusion, after weighing all the evidence on 
either side, being this — that such a distinction did 
exist, and was allowed by many, but was by no 
means recognized or observed by all. 

In classical Greek dvddrifia is quite the predomi- 
nant form, and that which alone Attic writers allow 
(Lobeck, PhryniGhus^ pp. 249, 445). It is there the 
technical word by which all such costly offerings as 
were presented to the gods, and then suspended or 
otherwise exposed to* view in their temples, all by 
the Romans termed * donaria,' as tripods, crowns, 
silver and golden vaffes, and the like, were called ; 
which were in this way separated for ever from all 
common and profane uses, and openly dedicated to 
the honour of that deity to whom they were present- 



NEW TESTAMJfiNT. 37 

ed at the first (Xenophon, Awiib. v. 3. 5 ; Pansanias, 
X.9). 

But with' the translation of the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures into Greek, a new thought demanded to find 
utterance. Those Scriptures spoke of two ways in 
which things and persons might be holy, set apart 
for God, devoted to Him. The children of Israel 
were devoted to Him ; God was glorified im, them : 
the wicked Canaanites were devoted to Him ; God 
was glorified on them. This awful fact, that things 
and persons might be devoted to Him for good, and 
for evil ; that there was such a thing as being " ac- 
cursed to the Lord " (Josh. vi. 17 ; cf. Deut. xiii. 16 ; 
Numb. xxi. 1 — 3) ; that of the spoil of the same 
city, a part might be consecrated to the Lord in 
His treasury, and a part utterly destroyed, and yet 
this part and that be alike dedicated to Him (Josh, 
vi. 19, 21) ; that in more ways than one a thing 
might be holy to Him (Lev. xvii. 28), — claimed its 
expression and utterance now, and found it in the 
two uses of one word ; which, while it remained the 
same, just differenced itself enough to indicate in 
which of the two senses it was employed. And 
here let it be observed, that those who find separa- 
tion from God as the central idea of avdOeiia^ are 
quite unable to trace a common bond of meaning 
between it and apd07)fiay which last is plainly sepa- 
ration to God ; or to show the point at which they 



88 SYNONYMS OF THE 

diverge from one another. Eatlier is it separation 
to God in botli cases.* 

Already in the Septuagint we begin to find 
avdOrifia and avddefia disengaging themselves fix>m 
one another, and from a confused and promiscuous 
use. How far, indeed, the distinction is observed 
there, and whether universally, it is hard to deter- 
mine, from the variety of readings in various edi- 
tions ; but in one of the later critical editions (that 
of Tischendorf, 1850), many passages (such for in- 
stance as Judith xvi. 19 ; Lev. xxvii. 28, 29), which 
appear in some earlier editions negligent of the 
distinction, are observant of it. In the New Testa- 
ment the distinction that dvddrjfia is used to express 
the ' sacrum' in a better sense, dvddefia in a worse, 
is invariably maintained. It must be allowed, in- 
deed, that the passages there are not numerous 
enough to convince a gainsay er ; he may attribute 
to hazard the fact that they fall in with this distinc- 

^ Flacins niyrious {Clavis Scripturce, s. y. Anathema^ ezoellent- 
Ij explains the manner in which the two apparently opposed 
meanings unfold themselves from a single root: Anathema igitur 
est res ant pei-sona Deo obligata aut addicta; sive quia Ei ab 
hominibus est pietatts causA oblata: sive quia justitia Dei talcs, ob 
singularia aliqua piacula veluti in suos caroeres poenasque abripuit, 
comprobante et deolarante id etiam hominum sententilt. . . . Duplici 
enim de caus& Deus vult aliquid habere; vel tanquam gratom 
acceptumque ac sibi oblatum ; vel tanquam sibi exoaum, suieque 
irsB ac castigationi subjectum ac debitura. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 39 

tion ; dvdOfjfia occurring only once : " Some spake 
of tiie temple, how it was adorned with goodly 
stones and ffifts " {avadtj/jLaa-i^ Luke xxi. 6) ; and 
avddefia no more than six times (Acts xxiii. 14 ; 
Eom. ix. 3 ; 1 Oor. xii. 3 ; xvi. 22 ; Gal. i. 8, 9). 
Still none can deny that so far as these nses reach, 
they confirm this view of the matter; while if we 
turn to the Greek Fathers, we shall find some of 
them indeed neglecting the distinction ; but others, 
and these of the greatest among them, not merely 
implicitly allowing it, as does Clemens of Alexan- 
dria {Coh. ad Gen, 4), avddr^fjLa yeyovafj^ rS Oe^ 
xnrkp XpujTov : where the context plainly shows the 
meaning to be, we have become a costly offering to 
God; but explicitly recognising and drawing out 
the diflference with accuracy and precision. See, 
for instance, Chrysostom, Sbm. xvi. in Hom.j as 
quoted in Suicer's Thesaurus^ s. v. dvdOefia. 

And thus, putting all which has been urged to- 
gether, — the d priori probability, drawn from simi- 
lar phenomena in all languages, that the two forms 
of a word would gradually have two different mean- 
ings attached to them ; the wondrous way in which 
the two aspects of dedication to God are thus set 
out by slightly different forms of the same word; 
the fact that every place in the New Testament, 
where the words occur, falls in with this scheme ; 
the usage, though not perfectly consistent, of later 



40 SYBTONYMB OF THE 

ecclesiastical books,— I cannot bnt conclude that 
cofaBrnia and cwdOefui are employed not accidentally 
by the sacred writers of the New Covenant in dif- 
ferent senses ; but that St Luke uses avoBrifia^ be- 
cause he intends to express that which is dedicated 
to God for its own honour as well as for God's 
glory ; St. Paul uses avdOefjua, because he intends 
that which is devoted to God, but devoted, as were 
the Canaanites of old, to his honour indeed, but its 
own utter loss ; even as in the end every intelligent 
being, capable of knowing and loving God, must 
be either apdOfffui or avaOefia to Him. (See Wit- 
sius. Misc. Sac. vol. ii. p. 54, sqq. ; Deyling, Ohss. 
Sac. vol. ii. p. 496, sqq.) 



§ vi. — irpoifyriTeva), fiavrevofuu. 

Ilpoifyrfrewo is a word of constant occurrence in 
the New Testament; fia^mevo/iat occurs but once, 
namely at Acts xvi. 16 ; where of the girl possessed 
with the " spirit of divination,'' or spirit of Apollo, 
it is said that she " brought her masters much gain 
h/ aoothaaymg " (jiavrevofievfi). The abstinence jfrom 
the use of this word on all other occasions, and the 
use of it on this one, is very observable, fumisliing 
as it does a very notable example of that instinctive 



NEW TESTAMENT. 41 

wisdom wherewith the inspired writers keep aloof 
from all words, the employment of which would 
have tended to break down the distinction between 
heathenism and revealed religion. Thus eifScufjLoviaj 
although from a heathen point of view a religious 
word, for it ascribes happiness to the favour of the 
deity, is yet never employed to express Christian 
blessedness ; nor could it fitly have been so, Saifuovy 
which supplies its base, involving polytheistic error. 
In like manner apen;, the standing word in heathen 
ethics for * virtue,' is of very rarest occurrence in 
the New Testament ; it is found but once in all the 
writings of St. Paul (Phil. iv. 8) ; and where else 
(which is only in the Epistles of St Peter), in quite 
different uses from those in which Aristotle employs 
it.* In the same way ^fty, which gives us * ethics,* 
occurs only on a single occasion, and, which indi- 
cates that its absence elsewhere is not accidental, 
this once is in a quotation from a heathen poet 
(1 Cor. XV. 33). The same precision in maintaining 
these lines of demarcation is again strikingly mani- 
fested in the fact of the constant use of OvaiaaTijpiop 
for the altar of the true God, occurring as it does 
more than twenty times in the books of the New 
Covenant, while on the one occasion when an hea- 

' Yerbum nimitiin humile, — as Bezo, accounting for its absence^ 
aaya^ — si cum donis S. S. comparetar. 



42 BTNOIiTMS OF TES 

then altar has need to be named, the word is 
changed, and instead of OvaLaanjpiop ('altare'), 
So^fjbo^ ('ara') is used (Acts xvii. 23); the feeling 
which dictated the exclusion of fimfios long survi- 
ving in the Church, so that, as altogether profane, 
it was quite shut out from Christian terminology 
(August!, HomMuch der ChrUHAcher Archnologie^ 
vol. i. p. 412). 

In conformity with this same law of moral fit- 
ness in the selection of words, we meet with 'irpo- 
^T€vuv as the constant word in the New Testament 
to express the prophesying by the Spirit of God ; 
while directly a sacred writer has need to make 
mention of the lying art of heathen divination, he 
employs this word no longer, but fmvreveaOai, in 
preference (cf. 1 Sam. xxviii. 8 ; Deut. xviii. 10). 
What the essential difference between the two 
things, prophesying and soothsaying, the ' weissa- 
gen ' and the ^ wahrsagen ' is, and why it was ne- 
cessary to keep them distinct and apart by different 
terms used to designate the one and the other, we 
shall best perceive and understand, when we have 
considered the etymology of one, at least, of the 
words. Mavreiofiai being from fidvri<ij is through 
it connected, as Plato has taught us, with /mvia and, 
fialvofMac. It will follow from this, that the word 
has reference to the tumult of the mind, the fiiry, 
the temporary madness under which those were, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 4S 

who were supposed to be possessed by the god, 
during the time that they delivered their oracles ; 
this mantic fury of theirs displaying itself in the 
eyes rolling, the lips foaming, the hair flying, with 
all other tokens of a more than natural agitation.* 
It is quite possible that these symptoms were some- 
times produced, as no doubt they were often height- 
ened, in the seers. Pythonesses, Sibyls and the like, 
by the use of drugs, or by other artificial means. 
Yet no one who believes that real spiritual forces 
underlie all forms of idolatry, but will also believe 
that there was often much more in these manifesta- 
tions than mere trickery of this kind ; no one with 
any insight into the awful mystery of the false wor- 
ships of the world, but will believe that these symp- 
toms were the evidence and expression of an actual 
connexion in which these persons stood to a spirit- 
ual world — a spiritual world, indeed, which was 
not above them, but beneath. 

' Cicero, who loves to bring out, where he can, superiorities of 
the Latin language over the Greek, claims, and I think with rea- 
son, such a superiority here, in that the Latin has * divinatio,* a 
word embodying the divine character of prophecy, and the fact 
that it was a gift of the gods, where the Greek had only fiamiai, 
which, seizing not the thing itself at any central pointy did no 
more than set forth one of the external signs which accompanied 
its giving. (De Divin. i. 1) : Ut alia nos melius raulta quam 
Graeci, sic huio prsestantissims rei nomen nostri a divis ; Gr»ci, 
nt Plato interpretatur, a furore duzemnt 



J 



44 ' SYKOHYHS OF THE 

Revelation, on the other hand, knows nothing 
of this mantic fury, except to condemn it. "The 
spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets " 
(1 Cor. xiv. 82). The true prophet is, indeed, rapt 
out of himself; he is " in the Spirit '' (Rev. i. 10) ; 
he is " in an ecstasy '' (Acts xi. 5) ; he is vtto Uvev- 
/LUIT09 *Ayiov <l>€p6fi€vo^ (2 Pet. i. 21), which is 
very much more than * moved,' as we have rendered 
it ; rather * getrieben,' as De Wette ; and we must 
not go so far in our opposition to heathen and Mon- 
tanist error as to deny this, which some, especially 
of those engaged in controversy with the Montanists, 
have done. But then he is not "beside himself; he 
is lifted ahovey not thus set heddey his every-day self. 
It is not discord and disorder, but a higher harmo- 
ny, a diviner order, that is introduced into his soul; 
so that he is not as one overborne in the region of 
his lower life by forces stronger than his own, by 
an insurrection from beneath ; but his spirit is lift- 
ed out of that region into a clearer atmosphere, a 
diviner day, than any in which at other times it is 
permitted him to breathe. All that he before had 
still remains his, only purged, exalted, quickened, 
by a power higher than his own, but yet not alien 
to his own ; for man is most truly man, when he is 
most filled with the fulness of God.' Even within 

' Sef John Smith, the Cambridge Pkionist, On Prophecy ; eh. 4. 



JSnSW TESTAMENT. 46 

the sphere of heathenism itself, the su\>erior digni- 
ty of the '!rpoj>7irri<i to the fiavrt,^ was recognised ; 
and recognised on these very grounds. Thus there 
is a well known and often cited passage in the Ti- 
mosfua of Plato (71 ^, 72 a, h\ where exactly for this 
reason, that the fiavri^ is one in whom the powers 
of the understanding are suspended, who, according 
to the derivation of the word, more or less rages, 
the line is drawn broadly and distinctly between 
him and the Trpo^^^Tny?, the former is subordinated 
to the latter, and his utterances only allowed to pass 
after they have received the seal and approbation 
of the other. The truth which the best heathen 
philosophy had a glimpse of here, was permanently 
embodied in the Christian Church in the fact that, 
while it assumed the TrpoifynTeveiv to itself, it ascribed 
the /lavreveaOat to that heathenism which it was 
about to displace and overthrow. 

The difference of the true prophetical Spirit from an enthutioHical 
Imposture, 



46 STNONYMS 6F THB 



§ vii. — TCfioDpUiy KoXcuri^. 

Of these words the former occurs but once in 
the New Testament (Heb. x. 29), and the latter only 
twice (Matt. xxv. 46 ; 1 John iv. 18). In rificopia, 
according to its classical use, the vindicati/ve charac- 
ter of the punishment is the predominant thought ;. 
it is the Latin ^ ultio ; ' punishment as satisfying the 
inflicter's sense of outraged justice, as defending his 
own honour, or that of the violated law ; herein its 
meaning agrees with its etymology, being from rt/ti;, 
and o0/}O9, opdcoj the guardianship or protectorate of 
honour. In fcoXcurc^, on the other hand, is more the 
notion of punishment as it has reference to the cor- 
rection and bettering of him that endures it ; it is 
* castigatio,' and has naturally for the most part a 
milder use than rifuopui. Thus we find Plato 
{jProtag. 333 «), joining KoXdcrei^ and voi;^eTi;<r6t9 
together : and the whole passage to the end of the 
chapter is eminently instructive as to the distinction 
between the words : ovBeU KoXd^ei rov^ aSiKOvvra^ 
OTL ^Sl/crjaePj oari^ firj wcTrep 0f)plov aKoyiaTOD^ rt- 
fitopetraiy . . . aX\^ rov fiiXKomro^ X^P^^^ '^^^ /^V 
aidt^ aSi/ci]<rp : the same change of the words which 
he employs, occurring again twice or thrice in the 
sentence. Compare an instructive chapter in Cle- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 47 

mens of Alexandria, 8t/rom. iv. 24. And this is 
Aristotle's distinction {BJiet. i. 10) : Sca<f>€p€c Se t*- 
fuopia Kol fcoXaat^ ^ fikv ycLp K6\€un<$ rov irda'XpVTo^ 
evcKa ioTCV 17 Se rifiiopiaj rov ttovovvto^, Xva airo- 
7r\f}pa)0^ : of. Ethic. Nio, iv. 5 : rt^uopia Travel t^9 
opyrj^j rfiovfiv ami t^9 \v7n79 ifiiroiovaa. 

It would be a very serious error, however, to 
attempt to transfer this distinction in its entireness 
to the words as employed in the New Testament 
The Kokaai^ aldvu)^ of Matt. xxv. 46, as it plainly 
itself declares, is no corrective and therefore tem- 
porary discipline ; it can be no other than the dOd^ 
vaTo<$ rifjuopia (Josephus, JB. J. ii. 8, 11), the dlZloi, 
TifjLCDpiat (Plato, Ax. 372 a), with which the Lord 
elsewhere threatens finally impenitent men (Mark 
ix. 43 — 48) ; for in proof that Kokaais had acquired 
in Hellenistic Greek this severer sense, and was 
used simply as punishment or torment, with no ne- 
cessary underthought of the bettering through it 
of him who endured it, we have only to refer to 
such passages as the following : Josephus, Antt. xv. 
2. 2 ; Philo, De Agricul. 9 ; Mart. Polyca/r. 2 ; 2 
Mace. iv. 38 ; Wisd. of Sol. xix. 4. This much, in- 
deed, of Aristotle's distinction still remains, and 
may be recognised in the sacred usage of the words, 
that in Kokaais the relation of the punishment to 
the punished, in ri/Mopla to the puniflhe>^, Vf pre- 
dominant. 



48 8YN0NY1CS OF THE 



§ viii. — u\fj0i]^, aXajdipo^. 

In the Latin ' verax ' and ' verus ' would seve- 
rally represent these two words, and in the main 
reproduce the distinctions existing between them ; 
indeed the Vulgate does commonly by their aid in- 
dicate whether aXfjOi]^ or d\r)dcv6^ stands in the* 
original: but the English language has only the 
one word ' true ' by which to render them both ; so 
that of necessity, and by no fault of the translators, 
the difference between them disappears in our ver- 
sion. And yet this difference is a most real one. 
What exactly the nature of it is, a single example 
will at once make evident. God is ©€09 0X17^179, 
and He is ©eo? aXrjOcpo^ : but very different attri- 
butes and prerogatives are ascribed to Him by the 
one epithet, and by the other. God is aXTfdij^ (John 
iii. 33 ; Rom.lii. 4 ; = verax), inasmuch as He can- 
not lie, as He is a-^evSij? (Tit. i. 2), the truth-speak- 
ing, and the truth-loving God (cf. Euripides, lony 
1554). But He is a\v0iv6^ (1 Thess. i. 9 ; John xvii. 
8; -=» verus), very God, as distinguished from idols, 
and all other false gods, the dreams of the diseased 
fancy of man, having no substantial existence in 
the actual world of realities. "The adjectives in 
'irvo^ express the material out of which anything is 



NEW TESTAMENT. 49 

made, or rather they imply a mixed relation, of 
quality and origin, to the object denoted by the sub- 
stantive from which they are derived. Thus ^vK-c- 
V09 means 'of wood,' 'wooden;' [oarpaK-i-vo^j 'of 
earth,' ' earthen ; ' vaX-i-vo^, ' of glass,' ' glassy ; '] 
and a\ff0-i-v6^ signifies ' genuine,' made up of that 
which is true [that which in chemical language has 
truth for its stuff and base]. This last adjective is 
particularly applied to express that which is all that 
it pretends to be ; for instance pure gold as opposed 
to adulterated metal." (Donaldson, JVew CraiyluSy 
p. 426.) 

It will be seen from this last remark that it does 
not of necessity follow, that whatever may be con- 
trasted with the a\ffdiv6<i^ should thereby be con- 
cluded to have no substantial existence, to be alto- 
gether false and fraudulent. Inferior and subordi- 
nate realizations, partial and imperfect anticipations, 
of the truth, may be set over against the truth in 
its highest form, in its ripest and completest devel- 
opment ; and then to this last alone the title^dXi;^*- 
v6^ will be vouchsafed. Thus Xenophon aflBrms of 
Cyrus {Ancib. i. 9. 17), that he commanded d\7)0ivbp 
crparevfjM^ an army indeed, an army deserving tlie 
name ; but would not have altogether reftised this 
name of ' army ' to inferior hosts ; and Plato {Tim. 
25 a), calling the sea beyond the Straits of Hercu 
les, TriXayo? Bvrw^y aXrjdcvo^ irovro^y wotdd say that 
3 



50 SYNONYMS OF THE 

it alone realized toihe fvU the idea of the great 
ocean deep ; of. Pol, i. 347 d: o r^ Svrt a\r)0iv6^ 
apxo>v. We should frequently miss the exact force 
of the word, we should, indeed, find ourselves en- 
tangled in many and serious embarrassments, if we 
understood it necessarily as the true opposed to the 
false. Rather it is very often the substantial as 
opposed to the shadowy and outlinear ; as Origen 
{in Joan. tom. ii. § 4) has well expressed it : aXrjdtvo^^ 
TTpo^ avTiScaaroXrjp gkiom koX tvttov tcai eucovo^. 
Thus, at Heb. viii. 2, mention is made of the (naqvi} 
oKfjOipij into which our great High Priest entered ; 
which, of course, does not imply that the tabernacle 
in the wilderness was not also most truly pitched 
at God's bidding, and according to the pattern 
which he had shown; but only that it, and all 
things in it, were weak earthly copies of things 
which had a real and glorious existence in heaven 
{avrlrvira r&v akrjdip&v) ; the passing of the Jewish 
High Priest into the Holy of Holies, with all else 
pertaining to the worldly sanctuary, being but the 
cKiib r&p fieWotnrtov aryaO&Vj while the ap^fiay the 
filling up of these outlines, was of and by Christ 
(Col. ii. 17).* 

' This F. Spaabeim (Dub, JEvang. 106) has weU put: 'AXi^tftia 
in SeripturtL SacrlL intdrdam snmitiir etbioe, et opponitor falsitaU 
€t mendaoio ; interdam mystice, 0t opponitur typis et umbrisy ut 
c{m6r illis respondens, qass Veritas alio modo etiam vitixa vocatur a 



NEW TESTAMENT. 51 

When in like manner it is said, "The law was 
given by Moses, bnt grace and truth came by Jesus 
Christ " (John i. 17), it is plain that the antithesis 
cannot lie between the false and the true, but only 
between the imperfect and the perfect, the shadowy 
and the substantial. So too the Eternal Word is 
declared to be to (f>ck to aXriOivov (John i. 9), not 
denying thereby that the Baptist was also " a burn- 
ing and a shining light " (John v. 35), or that the 
feiihful are "lights in the world" ^hil. ii. 15; 
Matt. V. 14), but only claiming for a Greater than 
all to be " the Light which lighteth every man that 
cometh into the world." * Christ declares Himself 
6 a/}T09 o aXridivos (John vi. 32), not that the bread 
which Moses gave was not also " bread of heaven " 
(Ps. cv. 40), but it was such only in a secondary 
inferior degree ; it was not food in the highest sense, 

Spiritu S. oppoeita rp <rKi^. C£ Deyling, Ohi%. Sac yoL iii p. 817 ; 
vol. iv. p. 648. 

* Lampe {in loe,) : Innuitur ergo hio oppositio tain laminarium 
natnraliiim, qnaliA fuere lux creationifl^ lux IsraSlitarom in iEgyp- 
to, lax colunmffi in deserto, lux gemmarum in pectorali, qua non 
nisi umbre fuere hujus verse lucis ; turn e«ram, qui Uiao se ease 
lumen hominum gloriantur, quales sigillatim fuere Sol et Luna 
Eoelesie Judaicce^ qui eum ortu hujus Lucis obspurandi, Joel, ii 
81 ; turn denique verorum quoque luminarium, sed in minore gra« 
du, qu»que omne suum lumen ab hoc Lumine muiuantur, qualia 
sunt omnes Sancti, Doctorea^ Angeli lacis, ipse denique Joannea 
Baptista. 



52 SYNONYMS OF THE 

inasmuch as it did not nourish up unto etemd life 
those that ate it (John vi. 49). He was 17 afiireko^ 
f} a\r)0t,vri (John xv. 1), not thereby denying that 
Israel also was God's vine, which we know it was 
(Ps. Ixxx. 8 ; Jer. ii. 21), but only aflSrming that 
none but He realized this name, and all that it im- 
plied, to the full (Hos. X. 1 ; Deut. xxxii. 82).* It 
would be easy to follow this up further ; but these 
examples, which the thoughtful student will observe 
are drawn chiefly from St. John, may suffice. The 
fact that in his writings the word oKajOcvd^ is U3ed 
two and twenty times as against five times in all 
the rest of the New Testament, is one which he will 
scarcely dismiss without a thought. 

To sum up then, as briefly as possible, the dif- 
ferences between the two words, we may affirm of 
the d\i7^i;9, that he fulfils the promise of his lips, 
but the aXrjOivo^ the wider promise of his name. 
Whatever that name imports, taken in its highest, 
deepest, widest sense, that he realizes to the full. 

* Lampe: Ohrisfcus est Vitis vers, . . . et qnk talis jw«pont, quin 
et opponi, potest omnibus aliis qui etiam sub hoc symbolo in scrip- 
tis propheticis pbguntnr. 



NEW TESTAMENT. SH 



§ix. — depdirmvj SovXo^, hiaKOvo^y vTrtfpiTTjf;. 

The only passage in the New Testament in 
which Oepam-tov occurs is Heb. iii. 6 : " And Moses 
verily was faithftil in all his house, as a servant " 
(c&9 Oepdirtov), The allusion here to Numb. xii. 7 is 
manifest ; at which place the Septuagint has given 
depdircjp as its rendering of 'r^ij ; which yet is not 
its constant rule ; for it has very frequently render- 
ed it not by Oepdircov^ but by SovX,o^. Out of this 
latter rendering, no doubt, we have, at Eev. xv. 3, 
the phrase, Mcovaij^ 6 Sov\o<; rov Oeov. From the 
fact that the Septuagint translates the same Hebrew 
word, now by SoCXo?, now by Oepdirtov^ it will not 
follow that there is no difference between the words ; 
nor yet that there may not be occasions when the 
one would be far more appropriately employed than 
the other ; but only that there are other occasions 
which do not require the bringing out into promi- 
nence of that which constitutes the difference be- 
tween them- And such real difference there is. 
The hov\o<i (opposed to ikevdepos^ Eev. xiii. 16 ; xix. 
18 ; Plato, Gorg. 502 d) is one in a permanent rela- 
tion of servitude to another, and that, altogether 
apart from any ministration to that other at the 
present moment rendered ; but the Oepdirtov is the 



64 SYNONYMS OF THE 

performer of present services without respect to 
the fact whether as a freeman or a slave he renders 
them ; and thus, as will naturally follow, there goes 
constantly with the word the sense of one whose 
services are tenderer, nobler, freer than those of 
the &>j)\o9. In the verb depaireveiv (' curare '), as 
distinguished from Sov\€V€iVy and connected with 
* faveo,' ^ foveo,' Qakirw^ the nobler and more careftil 
character of the service comes still more strongly 
out. It may be used of the physician's watchful 
tendance of the sick, man's service of God, and is 
beautifully applied by Xenophon (Jf^m. iv. 3. 9) to 
the care which the gods have of men. Thus Achil- 
les, in Homer, styles Patroclus his Oepdircov {IL xvi. 
244), one whose service was not constrained, but 
the officious ministration of love. Merioneus is 
OepdiTdDv to Idomeneus (xxiii. 113), and all the 
Greeks are Oepdirovre; *'Aprjo^ (ii. 110 and often). 
So too in Plato (Symjp. 203 c) Eros is styled the 
dKoKov0o<i Kal Oepdirtov of Aphrodite. With all 
which agrees the definition of Hesychius : oi iv 
Semipa rd^ei ^l\ot\ of Ammonius: oi {nrorerayfii' 
vov <l>i\oii ; and of Eustathius : to^p (jyiXcov ol hpaoTL- 
Kayrepoi, 

It will be seen then that the author of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, calling Moses a Oepdirtov in 
the house of God (iii. 5), implies that he occupied a 
more confidential position, that a freer service, a 



NEW TESTAMENT. 55 

liiglier dignitj was his, than that merely of a SovKo^y 
approaching more closely to that of an olKov6fi<ys in 
God's house ; and referring to Numb. xii. 6 — 8, we 
find, confirming this view, that a special dignity is 
there ascribed to Moses, lifting him above other 
SovTiOi of God. It would have been well if in our 
Version it had been in some way sought to indicate 
the exceptional and more honourable title here 
given to him who " was faithful in all God's house.'' 
The Vulgate has very well rendered depaircav by 
* famulus,' (so Cicero, ' famulse Idaeae matris ') ; Tyn- 
dal and Cranmer by * minister,' which perhaps is 
as good a word as in English could have been 
found. 

Neither ought the distinction between iidKoiwi 
and 8ot)Xo9 to be lost sight of and let go in the ren- 
dering of the New Testament There is no diffi- 
culty in preserving it. Alokovo^s^ not from hia and 
Kovi^y one who in his speed runs through the dust 
— a mere fanciful derivation, and forbidden by the 
quantity of Sidxovo^; — is probably from the same 
root as has given us Buoxca, ' to hasten,' or 'pursue.' 
The difference between StaKovof: on one side, and 
Sov\o<: and 0€pdwa>v on the other, is that SioKovog 
represents the servant in his activity Jbr the work 
{huzfcovelv Tt, Eph. iii. 7; Col. i. 23; 2 Cor. iii. 6), 
not in his relation either servile, as that of the Sod- 
A^, or more voluntary, as in the case of the Oepd* 



56 BYNONTMS OF THB 

^coj/, to a person. The attendants at a feast, and 
these with no respect to their condition as one of 
freedom or servitude, are as snch SiaKovoi (John ii. 
6 ; Matt. xxii. 13). What has just been said of the 
importance of maintaining the distinction between 
&)t)Xo9 and SiaKovo^ may be illustrated from the 
parable of the Marriage Supper (Matt. xxii. 2 — ^14). 
With us the king's " servants " bring in the invited 
guests (ver. 3, 4, 8, 10), and his " servants " are bid- 
den to cast out him that had not on a wedding gar- 
ment (ver. 13) : but in the Greek, those, the bring- 
ers-in of the guests are Sov\o^ ; these, the ftdfillers 
of the king's sentence, are SiAkopoi — this distinction 
being a most real one, and belonging to the essen- 
tials of the parable ; the SovT^i being men, the am- 
bassadors of Christ who invite their brethren into 
His kingdom now, the iiuKovoi the angels, who in 
all the judgment acts at the end of the world ever- 
more appear as the executors of the Lord's will. 
However the point of the parable may not turn 
on the distinction between them, yet they may no 
more be confounded than the hovXoi and Oepccrral 
of Matt. xiii. 27, 30 ; cf. Luke xix. 24. 

'TTrnpirrj^y which only remains to be considered, 
is a word drawn originally from military matters ; 
he is the rower (from epeo-o-o), ' remigo '), as distin- 
guished from the soldier on board a war-galley; 
then the performer of any strong and hard labour ; 



NEW TESTAMENT. ' 67 

then the subordinate official that waits to accomplish 
the commands of his superior, as the orderly that 
attends a commander in war (Xenophon, Cyrop. vi. 
2. 13). In this sense, as a minister to perform cer- 
tain defined functions for Paul and Barnabas, Mark 
was their imrjpiTrj^ (Acts xiii. 6) ; and in this official 
sense of lictor, apparitor, and the like, we find the 
word constantly, indeed predominantly used in the 
New Testament (Matt. v. 25 ; Luke iv. 20 ; John 
vii. 32 ; xviii. 18 ; Acts v. 22). The mention of both 
BovKoi and vTrrjperaL together (John xviii. 18) would 
be alone sufficient to indicate that a difference is 
there observed between them ; and from this differ 
ence it will follow that he who struck the Lord on 
the face (John xviii. 32) could not be, as some have 
supposed, the same whose ear He had but just 
healed (Luke xxii. 51), seeing that this last was a 
BovXo^^ that profane striker an \m"nperr)<; oi the High 
Priest. The meanings of Scaxovo^ and xnrqperrj^ are 
much more nearly allied ; they do in fact continu- 
ally run into one another, and there are a multitude 
of occasions on which they might be promiscuously 
used ; the more qffwial character of the vTnjpdrrf^ is 
the point in which the distinction ^xsV/e^n them 
resides. 



68 • SYNONYMS OF THE 



§ X. — BeiXia, ^6fio<f, evka^eia. 

Of these three words, the first is used always in 
a bad sense ; the second is a middle term, capable 
of a good interpretation, capable of an eyil, and 
lying pretty evenly between the two ; the third is 
quite predominantly used in a good sense, though 
it too has not altogether escaped being employed in 
an evil. 

AeiXiay the Latin ' timor,' having 0paauT7)q^ or 
' temerity,' for its opposite (Plato, Tim. 87 a), is our 
' cowardice.' It occurs only once in the New Tes- 
tament, 2 Tim. i. 7 ; but SetXtaco, John xiv. 27 ; and 
SeiK6<:y Matt. viii. 26 ; Mark iv. 40 ; Kev. xxi. 8. In 
this last passage the BeiKoi beyond doubt are those 
who in time of persecution have, out of fear of what 
they should suffer, denied the faith. It is joined to 
dvavSpela (Plato, Phoedr. 254 c; Legg. 859 J); to 
yjtvxpoTi]^ (Plutarch, J^db. Max. 17) ; to S/ckuav^ (2 
Mace. iii. 24) ; is ascribed by Josephus to the spies 
who brought an ill report of the Promised Land 
{Antt. iii. 15. 1) ; being constantly set over against 
avSpeia^ as SetXo? over against dvSpelo^ : as for exam- 
ple, in the long discussion qn valour and cowardice 
in Plato's FrotagoraSy 360 d; and see the lively 
description of the SetXo? in the Characters (29) of 



NEW TESTAMENT. 69 

Theophrastas. AeOUa does not of course itself al- 
low that it is such, but would shelter itself under 
the more honourable title of euXdfieia (Philo, De 
Fortit. 739) ; pleads for itself that it is aarj>aKeui 
(Plutarch, Anim. cm Corp, Ajpp. Pej, 3 ; Philo, Q^od 
Bet. Pot. Inaid. 11). 

^6l3o9y answering to the Latin term * metus,' is a 
middle term, and as such it is used in the New Tes- 
tament sometimes in a bad sense, but oftener in a 
good. Thus in a bad sense, Rom. viii. 15 ; 1 John 
iv. 18 ; cf. Wisd. of SoL xvii. 11 ; but in a good, 
Acts ix. 31 ; Eom. iii. 18 ; Eph. vi. 6 ; 1 Pet i. 17. 
^6fio<: being thus fiiaov^ Plato, in the passage from 
the Protagoras referred to above, adds aurxpo^ to 
it, as often as he would indicate the timidity which 
misbecomes a man. 

EvXdfieuiy which only occurs twice in the New 
Testament (Heb. v. 7 ; xii. 28), and on each occa- 
sion signifies piety contemplated on the side in 
which it is a fea/r of God, is of course from €v Xa/*- 
PaveaOaij the image underlying the word being that 
of the careful taking hold, the cautious handling, of 
some precious yet delicate vessel, which with ruder 
or less anxious handling might easily be broken. 
But such a carefiilness and cautiousness in the con- 
ducting of affairs, springing as no doubt in part it 
does from a fear of miscarriage, easily lies open to 
the charge of timidity. Thus Demosthenes claims 



60 SYNONYMS OF THE 

for himself that he was only ev\a^ri<;^ where his 
enemies charged him with being ieCkos and aroXfio^. 
It is not wondeiful then that fear should have come 
to be regarded as an essential element of euXaySeta, 
though for the most part no dishonourable fear, but 
such as a wise and good man might not be ashamed 
to entertain. Cicero, Tusc. iv, 6: Declinatio [a 
malis] si cum ratione fiet, cautio appelletur, eaque 
intelligatur in solo esse sapiente ; qusB autem sine 
ratione et cum examinatione humili atque fractS, 
nominetur metus. He has probably the definition 
of the Stoics in his eyes. These, while they disal- 
lowed ^6^<y; as a TrdOo^y admitted eiXd^eia into the 
circle of virtues. Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 116 : 
rrfv he evXd^eiav [ivavriav ^a\v €lvaC\ r^ ^o^tp^ 
oiaav evXoyov e/cfckiaLV <f>ofir)0i]a'€a0(U fikv yhp rov 
ao<f>ov ovSafim, €ii\a^r)6i]aea'6at Si. It is joined to 
TTpovoia by Plutarch, Marc, 9 ; and set over against 
0pdao<$ by Demosthenes, 517. 



§ xi. — kcucUlj wovrfpia^ Koucorjdeta, 

"We are probably at first inclined to regard Kaieia 
in the New Testament as expressing the whole 
complex of moral evil, as vice in general ; and in 
this latitude no doubt it is often used. Thus, aperaX 



NEW TESTAMENT. 61 

Kal KOKuu are * virtues and vices ' (Aristotle, JShet. 
ii. 12; Plutarch, Covj. Proec. 25, and continually); 
while Cicero {Tv^c, iv. 15) refiises to translate KaKiu 
by ' malitia,' choosing rather to coin * vitiositas ' for 
the occasion, giving this as his reason : Nam malir 
iia certi cujusdam vitii nomen est, vitiositaa om- 
nium ; showing plainly that in his eye KaKLa was 
the name »not of one vice, but of all. Yet a little 
consideration of the passages in which it occurs in 
the New Testament, must make evident that it is 
not there so used ; for then we should not find it as 
one in a long catalogue of sins (Kom. i. 29 ; Col. iii. 
8) ; seeing that in it alone the others would all have 
been contained. We must therefore seek for it a 
more special meaning, and bringing it into compari- 
son with TTovqpiay we shall not err in saying that 
KaKia Is more the evil habit of mind, irovrjpCa rather 
the outcoming of the same. Thus Calvin says of 
KaKia (Eph. iv. 32) : Significat hoc verbo [Aposto- 
lus] animi jpravitatem quae humanitati et eequitati 
est opposita, et malignitas vulgo nuncupatur. Our 
English translators, rendering xaxla so often by 
'malice' (Eph. iv. 32; 1 Cor. v. 8; xiv. 20; 1 
Pet. ii. 1), show that they regarded it in the same 
light. 

But the TTovrjpo^ is, as Hesychius calls him, 6 
Spacm/cb^ rod /ea/covj the active worker out of evil ; 
the German * Bosewicht,' or as Beza {Arniott. in 



J 



62 BTNONYMS OF THE 

MaU. V. 37) has drawn the distinction : Significat 
irovripo^ aliquid amplins quam iccuco^^ nempe eum 
qiii sit in omni scelere exercitatus, et ad injoriam 
cuivis inferendam totus comparatus. He is, accord- 
ing to the derivation of the word, 6 irapkxfinv mvov^y 
or one that, as we say, "puts others to trouble ;" 
and 7rovf}pia is the cupiditas nocendi ; or as Jeremy 
Taylor explains it : " aptness to do shrewd turns, 
to delight in mischiefs and tragedies ; a loving to 
trouble our neighbour and to do him ill offices; 
crossness, perverseness, and peevishness of action 
in our intercourse" {Doctrine and Practice of 
Repentance^ iv. 1). If the KaKo^ is opposed to 
the ojyados^ and the ^avko^; to the KokoKayaOo^j 
the 7rov7)p6^ would find his exact contrast in the 

While these words, KOKia and irovripia^ occur 
several times in the Ne^w Testament, tcaxoijdeta 
octirs there but once, namely, in St. Paul's long 
and fearful enumeration of the wickednesses with 
which the Gentile world was filled (Rom. i. 29), 
and never in the Septuagint. We have translated 
it ' malignity.' When, however, we take it in this 
wider meaning, it is very difficult to assign to it any 
district which has not been already preoccupied 
either by KaKia or Trovrjpia. Even supposing the 
exact limits which separate these two words have 
not been perfectly traced^ yet between them they 



NEW TESTAMENT. 63 

will have left little or no room unappropriated 
for 'malignity' to occupy as peculiarly its own. It 
would therefore seem preferable to understand ica- 
Ko^Oeia here in the more restricted meaning which 
it sometimes possesses. The Geneva version has 
done so, which has rendered it by a periphrasis, 
"taking all things in the evil part;" which is ex- 
actly the definition that Aristotle, of whose ethical 
terminology the word forms a part, gives {Bhet. ii. 
13) : icni, yap KOKorfdua to iirl ro xelpov vTroXafifid- 
v€Lv airavraj or, as Jeremy Taylor calls it, " a base- 
ness of nature by which we take things by the 
wrong handle, and expound things always in the 
worst sense;" the 'malignitas interpretantium ' 
(Pliny, ^. V. 7) ; * being exactly opposed to what 
Seneca {De Ird, ii. 24) has so beautifully called the 
* benigna rerum sestimatio.' For precisely this use 
of KaKvffi(o<i see Josephus, Arvtt, vii. 6. 1 ; cf. 2 Sam. 
X. 3. This giving to all words and actions of others 
their most unfavourable interpretation Aristotle 
marks as one of the vices of the old, in that mourn- 
ful, yet for the Christian most instructive, passage, 
which has been referred to just now; they are 
koKQfffi^i^ and KaxyTronrrou We shall scarcely err 
then, taking icaicorjdeuL^ at Kom. i. 29, in this nar- 

* How striking, by the way, this use of ' interpretor/ as 'to 
interpret awry* in Tacitus (himself probably not wholly untouohed 
with the yice), Pliny, and the other writers of their age* 



64 SYNONYMS OF THE 

rower meaning ; the position which it occupies i^ 
St. Paul's list of sins entirely justifies us in regard- 
ing it as that peculiar form of evil which manifests 
itself in a malignant interpretation of the actions 
of others, an attributing of them all to the worst 
motive. 

Nor should we take leave of the word without 
noticing the deep psychological truth attested in 
this its secondary employment — this truth, I mean; 
that the evil which we find in ourselves causes us 
to suspect and believe evil in others. The koko- 
ridrj^j according to the original constitution of the 
word, is he that is himself of an evil ^^09 or moral 
habit: but such an one projects himself, and the 
motives which actuate him, into others, sees him- 
self in them ; and as Love on the one side, in those 
glorious words of Schiller, 

"delightedlj belieyes 
BiyinitieSy being ittelf divine,^ 

SO that which is itself thoroughly evil, finds it al- 
most impossible to believe anything but evil in 
others. The reader of the JSepvhlio of Plato will 
remember that remarkable passage (iii. 409 a, 5), 
in which Socrates, showing how it is good for phy- 
sicians to have had chiefly to do with the sick, but 
not for teachers and rulers with bad meii, accounts 
for the fact that the yet uncorrupted young men 



NEW TESTAMENT* 65 

are evrjBu^^ as over against the KaxajjOei*:, on this 
ground, namely, &r€ ovk eyovre^ iv lavrofe irapa- 
Selyfuira ofiounradrj roT^ TrovrjpoU, 



§ xii. — ayawcuOf (f>i\i(o. 

Wb have not, I believe, in any case attempted 
to discriminate between these two words in oui 
English Version. It would not have been easy, 
perhaps not possible to have done it ; and yet there 
is often a diflference between them, one very well 
worthy to have been noted, if this had lain within 
the compass of our language ; and which makes 
the two words to stand very much in the same rela- 
tion to on§ another as ' diligo ^ and * amo ' in the 
Latin. It may be worth our while to realize to 
ourselves the exact distinction between these two 
Latin words, as it will help us much to understand 
that which exists between those which are the more 
immediate object of our inquiry. We have here 
abundant help from Cicero, who often sets the 
words in a certain instructive antithesis one to the 
other. Thus, writing to one friend of the aflPection 
in which he holds another {J^. Fam. xiii. 47) : Ut 
scires ilium a me non diligi solum, verum etiam 
ama/ti; and again {Ad Brut. 1): L. Clodius valde 



66 SYNONYMS OF THE 

me diligity vel, nt ifji^ri/cdrrepop dicam, valde me 
amat. From these and various other passages to 
the same effect (there is an ample collection of them 
in Doderlein's Latein, Synorvyme^ vol. iv. p. 98 sq.), 
we might conclude that ' amare,' which corresponds 
to ^vXelv^ is stronger than * diligere,' which, as we 
shall see, corresponds to cvyairav : and this in a cer- 
tain sense is most true ; yet it is not a greater 
strength and intensity in the first word than in the 
second which accounts for these and for a multitude 
of similar employments of them. Emesti has suc- 
cessfully seized the law of their several uses, when 
he says : Diligere magis ad judicium, ama/re vero 
ad intimum animi sensum pertinet. So that, in 
fact, Cicero in the passage first quoted is saying, — 
" I do not esteem the man merely, but I love him ; 
there is something of the passionate warmth of af- 
fection in the feeling with which I regard him." 

But from this it will follow, that while firiena 
may desire rather ^ amari ' -than ' diligi ' by his 
friend, yet there are aspects in which the ' diligi ' 
is a higher thing than the ^ amari,' the ayaTrourdai 
than the <f>ik€ta0ai,. The first expresses a more rea- 
soning attachment, of choice and selection (diligere 
•= deligere), from seeing in the object upon whom 
it is bestowed that which is worthy of regard ; or 
else from a sense that such was fit and due toward 
the person so regarded, as being a benefactor, or 



NEW TESTAMENT* 67 

the like ; while the second, without being necessa- 
rily an unreasoning attachment, does yet oftentimes 
give less account of itself to itself; is more instinct- 
ive, is more of the feelings, implies more passion ; 
thus Dion Cass. 44 : i<f>iX^aaTe avrov w iraripa^ Kal 
f)ya7n]aaTe w evefiyenjv. From this last fact it fol- 
lows, that when the <f>i\€lv is attributed to a person 
of one sex in regard to one of another, it generally 
implies the passion of love, and is seldom employed, 
but rather dyairopy where such is not intended. 
Take as an example of this the use of the two 
words in John xi. The sisters of Bethany send to 
Jesus to announce that His friend Lazarus is sick 
(ver. 3) : no misunderstanding is here possible, and 
the words therefore run thus: hv ^cXei^ curOepet: 
cf. ver; 36. But where the Saviour's affection to 
the sisters themselves is recorded, St. John at once 
changes the word, which, to imchaste ears at least, 
might not have sounded so well, and instead of <f>i- 
Ticlvy expresses himself thus: fjy air a Se 6 ^iTjaoih 
rffv MdpOavj k. t. X. (ver. 5). We have an instruct- 
ive example of the like variation between the two 
words, and out of the same motives, at Wisd. viii. 
2, 3. At the same time the <l>CX£iv is not unusual to 
express the aflPection between persons of different 
sexes, and this where no passion, no cpco^, honour- 
able or dishonourable, is intended, if the case be 
one where nearness of blood at once and.^ itself 



68 SYNONYMS OF THE 

precludes the supposition of such, as that of a 
brother to a sister. See, for instance, Xenophon, 
Mem. ii. 7, 9, 11, a very useful passage in respect 
of the relation in which the two words stand to one 
another, and which shows us how the notions of 
respect and reverence are continually implied in 
the &^aTrai>^ which, though of course not excluded 
by, are stiU not involved in, the if>iXelv, Out of this 
which has been said it may be explained, that 
while men are continually bidden ayam-Sv top Oeov 
(Matt. xxii. 37 ; Luke x. 27 ; 1 Cor. viii. 3), and 
good men declared to do so (Rom. viii. 28 ; 1 Pet 
i. 8 ; 1 John iv. 21), the ^iXetv top Oeov is com- 
manded to them never. The Father, indeed, both 
wyawq. top TIop (John iii. 35), and also ^iXel top 
Tiop (John v. 20) ; with the first of which statements 
such passages as Matt. iii. 17, with the second, as 
John i. 18 ; Prov. viii. 22, 30, may be brought into 
connexion. 

In almost all these passages of the N'e\^ Testa- 
ment, the Yulgate, by the help of *diHgo' and 
^ amo,' has preserved and marked the distinction, 
which in each case we have been compelled to let 
go. It is especially to be regretted that at John 
xxi. 16 — 17 we have not been able to retain it, for 
the alternations there are singularly instructive, and 
if we would draw the whole meaning of the pas- 
sage forth, must not escape us unnoticed. On occa- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 69 

sion of that threefold "Lovest thou Me?" which 
the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, 
ayaw^^ fie ; At this moment, when all the pulses 
m the heart of the no^ penitent Apostle are beat- 
ing with an earnest affection toward his Lord^ this 
word on that Lord's lips sounds too cold ; not suffi- 
ciently expressing the warmth of his personal affec- 
tion toward Him. Besides the question itself, which 
grieves and hurts Peter (ver. 17), there is an addi- 
tional pang in the form which the question takes, 
sounding as though it were intended to put him at 
a comparative distance from his Lord, and to keep 
him there ; or at least as not permitting him to ap- 
proach so near to Him as fein he would. He there- 
fore in his answer substitutes for it the word of a 
more perBondi love, ^Os& ae (ver. 15). When 
Christ repeats the question in the same words as at 
the first, Peter in his reply again substitutes his 
<l>ik& for the ayaira^ of his Lord (ver. 16). And 
now at length he has conquered ; for when 
the third time his Master puts the question to 
him. He does it with the word which Peter feels 
will alone express all that is in his heart, and 
instead of the twice repeated dyaTr^v, his word 
is (f>iXel^ now (ver. 17). The question, grievous 
in itself to Peter, as seeming to imply a doubt 
in his love, is not any longer made more griev- 
ous still, by the peculiar shape which it as- 



70 SYNONYMS OF THE 

flumes.* All this subtle and delicate play of feeling 
disappears perforce, where the variation in the 
words used is incapable of being reproduced. 

Let me observe in conclusion that ipoo^, ipdv, 
ipcurn]9^ never occur in the New Testament, but 
the two latter occasionally in the Old; ipaaTrj^ 
generally in a dishonourable sieiise (Ezek. xyi. 33 ; 
Hofl. 11. 5) ; yet once or twice (as Wisd. viii. 2;. 
Prov. iv. 6) in a more honourable meaning, not as 
^amasius,' but 'amator.' A word or two on the 
causes of this their significant absence may here 
find place. In part, no doubt, the explanation of 
this absence is, that these words by the corrupt use 
of the world had become so steeped in earthly sen- 
sual passion, carried such an atmosphere of this 
about them, that the truth of God abstained fi-om 
the defiling contact with them ; yea, foimd out a 
new word for itself rather than betake itself to one 
of these. For it should never be forgotten that the 
substantive ayaTriy is purely a Christian word, no 
example of its use occurring in any heathen writer 
whatever; the utmost they attained to here was 
^ikavdpayrria and ^t\a&\^/a, and the last indeed 
never in any sense but as the love between brethren 
in bloodl This is Origen's explanation in an inter- 

^ Bengel generally has the hcmour lem aea tetigisse : here he 
has singularly missed it^ and is wholly astray: &7«iray, amAre^ eii 
necessitudinis et &ifect^ ; ^iXciy, diligere, jadi<m. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 71 

esting discussion on the subject, Prol, in Cant. vol. 
iii. pp. 28 — 30. But the reason may lie deeper than 
this. "E/owv, like so many other words, might have 
been assumed into nobler uses, might have been 
consecrated anew,_ despite of the deep degradation 
of its past history ; * and there were beginnings al- 
ready of this, in the Platonist use of the word, as 
the longing and yearning love after that unseen but 
eternal Beauty, the faint vestiges of which may 
here be everywhere traced.* But in the very fact 
that 6/00)9 did express this yearning love (in Plato's 
exquisite mythus, Symp. 203 J, "Epm^ is the child 
of Ilevia), lay the real unfitness of the word to set 
forth that Christian love, which is not merely the 
sense of need, of emptiness, of poverty, with the 

' On the attempt which some Christian writers have made to 
distinguish between ' amor' and * dilectio' or ' caritas,' see Augus- 
tine, J)e Oiv. Deif xiy. 1 : NonnuUi arbitrantur aliud esse dilectio- 
nem siye earitatem, aliud amorem. Dicunt e^im dUeotionem acei- 
piendam esse in bono, amorem in malo. He shows, by manj ex- 
amples of 'dilectio' and *diligo* used in an ill sense in the Latin 
Scripture^ of 'amor' and 'amo' in a good, the impossibility of 
maintaining any such distinction. 

' I cannot regard as a step in this direction the celebrated 
words of Ignatius, Ad Rom, *l : 6 i/ths 1ip»s iffradfrnrcu. It is far 
more consistent with the genius of these Ignatian Epistles to take 
fymt iubjectivelif here; "My love of the world is crucified,'* t.«. 
with Christy rather than objectively : ** Christy the object of i^y love^ 
if crueified." 



72 SYNONYMS OF THE 

longing after fulness, not the yearning after, an in* 
visible Beauty ; but a love to God and to man, 
which is the consequence of a love from God, al- 
ready shed abroad in the hearts of His people. 
The mere longing and yearning, which e/>a)9 at the 
best would imply, has given place since the Incar- 
nation to the love which is not in desire only, but 
also in possession. 



§ xiii. — OaKaaiTa^ wiXayo^. 

SaXaaaa^ like the Latin ^ mare,' is the sea as 
contrasted with the land (Gen. i. 10 ; Matt, xxiii. 
15 ; Acts iv. 24). ITeXoyo?, closely allied with 
TrXaf , TrXarw, * flat,' is the level uninterrupted ex- 
panse of open water, the ' altum mare,'* as distin- 
guished from those portions of it broken by islands, 
shut in by coasts and headlands. Hippias, in 
Plato's Gorgias (338 a), charges the eloquent soph- 
ist, Prodicus, with a ^eiyuv ek rb TreXayo? r&v 

^ It need not be obeeryed that^ adopted intp Latin, it has the 
same meaning: 

lit pelagus tennere rates, nee jam amplios alia 
Occorrit telluS) maria nndiqne et midiqne ccelnm. 

Virgil, jEh, t. 8, 9, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 78 

Xo^wv^ airoKpxn^avra yrjv.^ Breadth, and not depth, 
save as quite an accessory notion, and as that which 
will probably find place in this open sea, lies in the 
word. Thus the murmuring Isarelites, in Philo 
( Vit Mo8. 35), liken to a TreXayo? the illimitable 
sand-flats of the desert ; and in Herodotus (ii. 92), 
the Nile overflowing Egypt is said TreXayi^eiv rcL 
TreSia, which yet it does not cover beyond the depth 
of a few feet. A passage which illustrates well the 
distinction between the words, occurs in the TimcBua 
of Plato (25 a^ 5), where the title of iriXayo^ is re- 
fused to the Mediterranean sea ; that is but a har- 
bour, with the narrow entrance between the Pillars 
of Hercules for its mouth ; only the great Atlantic 
Ocean beyond can be acknowledged as aKr)0vvh 
irovTQ^j ir€\ayo<: oi/ro)?. And compare Aristotle, De 
Mun. 3 ; and again, Meteorol. ii. 1 : peovaa S' 17 
daXarra (fyaiverai xara Tct<: arei/oTt^To? [the Straits 
of Gibraltar], elirov Sih Trept^oi/o-ai/ yrjv ek fiiKpop 
i/c jJL&ydkov iTwar/€T(u 7r€Xa*yo9» 

It might seem, at first sight, as if this distinc- 
tion did not hold good in one of the only two pas- 
sages where the word occurs in the New Testancent, 
namely Matt, xviii. 6 : "It were better for him that 
a millstone were hanged about his neck, cmd that 
he were drovmed in the depth of the sea " {ical Karor 

* This last idiom reminds us of the French * noyer la terre,' ap- 
plied to a ship sailing out of sight of land. 
4 



74 SYNONYMS OP THE 

irovTiaffrj iv t^ TreXdyei rrj^ 0aXd<r<rfjf;). But the 
sense of depth, which undoubtedly the passage re- 
quires, is here to be looked for in the fcaTawovTia-' 
0§ : — TToin-o?, which indeed does not itself occur in 
the New Testament, being connected with fid0o<:j 
fiip0o<:, perhaps the same word as this last, and im- 
plying the sea in its perpendicular depth, as TreXo- 
yo9 {csquoT maris)^ the same in its horizontal dimen- 
sions and extent 



§ xiv. — aK\7jp6<i^ aifarr^pos. 

In the parable of the Talents (Matt, xxv.), the 
slothM servant charges his master with being 
aKXrjpo^, " an hard man " (ver. 24) ; while in the 
corresponding parable of St. Luke it is ava"rrfp6<;^ 
" an OAJstere man " (xix. 21), which he accuses him 
of being. It follows that the words are to a certain 
degree interchangeable ; but not that their mean- 
ings run exactly parallel throughout. They will be 
found, on the contrary, very capable of discrimina- 
tion and distinction, however the distinction may 
not affect the interpretation of these parables. 

^^Xi7/909, derived firom aK^KKto^ aicKrivcu^ ' arefa- 
cio,' is properly an epithet expressing that which 
through lack of moisture is hard and dry, and thus 



NEW TESTAMENT 76 

rough and disagreeable to the toucn; nay more, 
warped and intractable. It is then transferi'ed to 
the region of ethics, in which is by far its most fre- 
quent use ; and where it expresses the roughness, 
harshness, and intractability in the moral nature of 
a man. Thus it is an epithet applied to Nabal (1 
Sam. XXV. 3), and no other could better express the 
evil condition of the churl. Looking to the com- 
pany which a'K\rjp6<; keeps, we find it commonly 
Associated with such words as the following : avx" 
fi/rip6^ (Plato, Synvp. 195 d) ; avrmnro^i {TJiecEft. 156 
a) ; ay/oto? (Aristotle, Ethic, iv, 8) ; Plutarch {Cons, 
ad ApoU. 3) ; arpeTrro^ (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 
64, 117) ; irovTjpo^ (1 Sam. xxv. 3). It is set over 
against einjOiKo^ (Plato, Charm. 175 d)i fuOuuco^: 
{Protag. 331 d) ; frnXOaKo^ (Symp. 196 d). 

AxHTTnpo^j which in the New Testament only ap- 
pears in the single passage already referred to, and 
never in the Old, is in its primary meaning applied 
to such things as draw together and contract the 
tongue, which are, as we say, harsh and strmgervt 
to the palate, as new wine, not yet mellowed by 
age, unripe fruit, and the like. Thus, when the 
poet Cowper describes himself, when a boy, as 
gathering from the hedgerows " sloes austere^ he 
uses the word with exactest propriety. But just as 
we have transferred ' strict ' (from * stringo '), to the 
region of ethics, so the Greeks transferred awmjpo^j 



76 SYNONYMS OF THE 

the image here being borrowed from fhe taste, as m 
aK\rjp6<: it is borrowed from the touch. Neither 
does this word set out anything amiable or attractive 
in him to whom it is applied. We find it in such 
company as the following ; joined with a^&y? (Plato, 
I^ol. 398 a) ; Sxparo^i and avrjhxnno^ (Plutarch, Conj. 
Proec. 29) ; avrihvaro^i {Phoc. 5) ; avdUcurro^ ' {De 
Adul, et Am, 14). We find, further, Aristotle 
{^thic. Eudem. vii. 6), contrasting the av<m\po% 
with the exnpanreXjo^:^ which last word he uses in a 
good sense. 

At the same time it will be observed that in 
none of the epithets with which we have thus found 
aiarrjpi^ associated, is there that deep moral per- 
versity which lies in those with which afc\fjp6<: is 
linked ; and, moreover, it is met not seldom in more 
honourable company ; thus it is joined with <r(ixf>pa)p 
continually (Plutarch, Conj, Ptcbc. vii. 29 ; Qtcceat. 
Chr. 40) ; while the Stoics were wont to affirm all 
good men to be awTfipoi (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 
1. 64, 117) : ical avaTrjpov9 Be (fxurcv ehcu nrdvra/i 
TOW a-irovSaiov^ rw fii]T€ ainov^ irpo^ ^Sovrfv ofiiXelVj 
/j,^T€ Trap' SXKjohv ra irpos ^Bovifp irpoahexeaOcu, In 
Latin 'austerus' is predominantly an epithet of 

1 In Plutarch this word is used in an iU sense, as self-willed, 
'eigensinnig;* being one of the many, in all languages, which, be- 
ginning with a good sense (Aristotle, Eihic, Nic. iy. 7), ended with 
a bad 



K£W TESTAMENT. 77 

honour (Doderlein, Lot. Synon. vol. iii. p. 232). 
Tiie * austerus ' is one of an earnest, severe charac- 
ter, opposed to all levity ; needing, it may very well 
be, to watch against harshness, rigour, or morose- 
ness, into which his character might easily degene- 
rate (non austeritas ejus tristis, non dissoluta sit 
comitas, Quintilian, ii. 2. 5), but as yet not charged 
with these. 

We may distmgmsh, then, between o-^Xiy/w and 
avarffpo^ thus: cKXijpo^y applied to any, conveys 
always a reproach and a severe one, indicates a 
character harsh, inhuman, and (in the earlier use 
of the word) uncivil ; avarrfpo^^ on the contrary, 
does not always convey a reproach at all, any more 
than the German ^streng,' which is very different 
from ' hart ; ' and even where it does, yet one of com- 
paratively a milder and less opprobrious description. 



§ XV. — elKcav, ofiolaxrt^:, ofioiwfia. 

There is a double theological interest attending 
the distinction between el/ccov and the two words 
which are here brought into comparison with it ; 
the first belonging to the Arian controversy, and 
turning on the fitness or unfitness of the words 
before us to set forth the relation of the Son to the 



78 SYNONYMS OF. THE 

Father ; while the other is an interest that might 
seem at first sight remote from any controversy, 
which yet has contrived to insinuate itself into more 
than one, namely, whether there be a distinction, 
and if so what it is, between the image {eUaai) of 
God, in which, and the likeness {o/jLoiaais) of God, 
(ifter which man at the first is declared to have been 
created (Gen. i. 26). 

And first, for the distinction drawn between the 
words during the course of the long Arian debate. 
It is evident that eucoiv (fi*om ioiKo) and ofiouofia 
might often be used as equivalent, and in many po- 
sitions it would be indifferent whether of the two 
were employed. Thus they are convertibly used 
by Plato {Phcedr. 250 J), ofiouifiaTa and eUove: 
alike, to set forth the earthly patterns and resem- 
blances of the archetypal things in the heavens. 
When, however, the Church found it necessary to 
raise up bulwarks against Arian error and Arian 
equivocation, it drew a strong distinction between 
these words, one not arbitrary, but having essential 
difference for its ground. EUdv (— imago, imita- 
go) always supposes a prototype, that which it not 
merely resembles, but from which it is drawn. It 
is the German ' Abbild,' which invariably presumes 
a 'Vorbild;' Gregory If azianzene, Orat. 36: ainj 
yitp €Ik6vo^ (l>va'i^, fjuififjfjLa elvat, rov dfyxisrwrov. (Pe- 
tavius, De Trin. vi. 5, 6.) Thus, the monarch's 



HfEW TeeTAMENT. . 79 

head on the coin is euewv (Matt. xxii. 20) ; the reflec- 
tion of the snn in the water is its eMv (Plato, 
PhcedOy 99 d) ; the statue in stone or other material 
is €*/wiai/ (Eev. xiii. 14) ; the child is ifiyfti/x"^ euctop 
of his parents. But in the ofwimfm or o/jLoiaxri^j 
while there is resemblance, it by no means follows 
that it has been gotten in this way, that it is de- 
rived : it may be accidental, as one egg is like 
another, as there may exist a resemblance between 
two men who are not in any way akin to one another. 
Thus, as Augustine in an instructive passage brings 
out {QucBst, Ixxxiii. 74), the ' imago ' (== euccav) in- 
cludes and involves the ' similitude,' but the ' simi- 
litudo * (=-= ofjLoUoat^;) does not involve the * imago.' 
The reason will at once be manifest why elfemv is 
applied to the Son, as the expression of his relation 
to the Father (1 Oor. xi. 7 ; Ool. i. 16 ; cf. Wisd. of 
Sol. vii. 26) ; while among all the words of the 
family of o/io*o9, not merely none are so employed 
in the Scripture, but they have all been expressly 
forbidden and condemned by the Church ; that is, 
60 soon as ever it has had reason to suspect foul 
play, and that they are not used in good faith. 
Thus Hilary, addressing an Arian, says, " I may use 
them, to exclude Sabellian error ; but I will not al- 
low you to do so, whose intention is altogether dif- 
ferent " {Oon. Gonstaivt. Imp. 17 — 21). 

El/c(ov, when employed of the Son, like xapax- 



80 . SYNONYMS OF THE 

nip and diravjaa-fia (Heb. i. 8), with which theologi- 
cally it is nearly related, is indeed made^ucUe, hut, 
at the same time, it is true as far as it goes ; and in 
human language, employed for the setting forth of 
tmUis which transcend himian thought, we must 
be content with approximative assertions, seeking 
for the complement of their inadequacy, that which 
shall redress their insufficiency, from some other 
quarter. Each has its weak side, which must be 
supported by strength derived from elsewhere. 
El/cdv is not without its weakness ; for what image 
is of equal worth and dignity with the prototype 
from which it is imaged ? But it has also its strong 
side; it at any rate expresses derivation,* while 
ofioUiTq^i ofioiaxri^i or any other words of this fami- 
ly, expressing mere similarity, if they did not ac- 
tually imply, might yet suggest, and if they sug- 
gested, would seem to justify, error, and that with 
no compensating advantage. Exactly the same 
considerations ware at work here, which, in respect 
of the verbs yewav and tcri^eiVy did in this same con- 
troversy cause the Church to allow the one, and to 
condemn the other. 

The second interest in the discrimination of these 
words lies in the question which has often been dis- 
cussed, whether in that great fiat annoimcing man's 
original constitution, "Let us make man in our 



NEW TESTA3iENT. 81 

image {d/catv LXX., Dii Heir.), after our likeness " 
{ofioicDai^ LXX., r\wi Heb.), anything different was 
intended by the second than by the first, or whether 
the second is merely to be regarded as consequent 
upon the first, " in our image " and therefore 
" after our likeness." Both are claimed for man in 
the New Testament : the eUdp, 1 Cor. xi. 7 ; the 
ofioiayai^j Jam. iii. 9. 

Many of the early Fathers, as also of the 
Schoolmen, maintained that there was a real dis- 
tinction; Thus, the Alexandrians taught that the 
et^cai; was something m which men were created, 
being common to all, and continuing to man after 
the fall as before (Gen. ix. 6), while the 6fio{co(rt<i 
was something toward which man was created, that 
he might strive after and attain it ; Origen, Princ. 
iii. 6 : Imaginis dignitatem in primal conditione per- 
cepit, similitudinis vero perfectio in consummatione 
servata est ; cf. in Jocm. torn. xx. 20. It can hardly 
be doubted that the Platonist studies and predilec- 
tions of the Christian theologians of Alexandria had 
some influence upon them here, and on this distinc- 
tion which they drew. It is well known that Plato 
presented the 6fiou)v<T0ai rtp Qe^ Karh to SvvaTov 
{Thecet. 1Y6 a) as the highest scope of man's life ; 
and indeed Clement {Strom, ii. 22) brings the great 
passage of Plato to bear upon this very discussion. 
The Schoolmen, in like manner, drew a distinction, 
4* 



82 SYKONYMS OF THE 

although it was not this one, between " tnes^ two 
divine stamps upon man." Lombard, Sent. ii. diet. 
16 ; H. de S. Victore, De Anirnd^ ii. 25 ; De Sac. 
i. 6. 2: Imago secundum cognitionem veritatis, 
similitudo secundum amorem virtutis ; the first de- 
claring the intellectual, as the second the moral pre- 
eminence, in*which man was created. Many, how- 
ever, have refused to acknowledge these, or any 
other distinctions between the two declarations ; as, 
Baxter, for instance, who, in his interesting reply to 
Elliott's, the Indian Missionary's, inquiries on the 
subject, rejects them all as groundless conceits^ 
though himself in general only too anxious for dis- 
tinction and division {Life^ vol. ii. p. 296). 

It is hard to think that they were justified in 
this rejection ; for myself I should rather believe 
that the Alexandrians were very near the truth, if 
they did not grasp it altogether. There are emi- 
nently significant parts of Scripture, where the 
words of Jerome, originally applied to the Apoca- 
lypse, ' quot verba tot sacramenta,' can hardly be 
said to contain an exaggeration. Such a part is the 
history of man's creation and his fall, in the first 
three chapters of Genesis. We may expect to find 
mysteries there ; prophetic intimations of truths 
which it might require ages and ages to develop. 
And, without attempting to draw any very strict 
line between eUdav and ofiouoai^y or their Hebrew 



NEW TESTAMENT. 83 

originalB, I tiiink we may be bold to say that the 
whole history of man, not only in his original crea- 
tion, but also in his after restoration and reconstitu- 
tion in the Son, is significantly wrapped np in this 
double statement; which is double for this very 
cause, that the Divine Mind did not stop at the 
contemplation of his first creation, but looked on to 
him as " renewed in knowledge after the image of 
Him that created him " (Col. iii. 10) ; because it 
knew that only as partaker of this donble benefit 
would he attain the true end for which he was made. 



§ xvi. — aaoaria^ daikyeta. 

The man who is Arcoro?, it is little likely that he 
will not be aa€\y^<i also ; and yet aawia and oa-iK- 
y€M are not identical in meaning ; they will express 
different aspects of his sin, or at any rate contem- 
plate it fi-om different ppints of view. 

And first daorria, a word in which heathen ethics 
said much more than they intended or knew. It 
occurs thrice in the New Testament (Eph. v. 18 ; 
Ht i. 6 ; 1 Pet. iv. 4) ; once only in the Septuagint 
(Prov. xxviii. 7). Besides this we have the adverb 
aawroif^^ Luke xiv. 13 ; and a<ra>T09 once in the Sep- 
tuagint, Prov. vii. 11. At Eph. v. 18 we translate 



84 SYNONYMS OF THB 

it* excess;' in the other two places, 'not,' as the 
^&v a<r<oTO)^, 'in riotous living;' the Vulgate al- 
ways by ' luxuria ' and ' luxuriose,' words which, it 
is hardly needful to observe, imply in Latin much 
more of loose and profligate Kving than our ' luxu- 
ry ' and ' luxuriously ' do now. The word is some- 
times taken in a passive sense, as though it were 
&rGKrT09, one who cannot be saved, ady^ea-dai fit) 
BwdfjL€Po<;y as Clement of Alexandria {Pwdag. ii. 1) 
expressly explains it, = ' perditus,' ' heillos,' or as 
we used to say, a ' losel.' Grotius : Genus hominum 
ita immersorum vitiis, ut eorum salus deplorata sit; 
the word being, so to speak, prophetic of their 
doom to whom it was applied.' This, however, was 
quite its rarer use ; more commonly the aawro^ is 
not one who cannot be saved, but who cannot him- 
self save, or spare ; =- ' prodigus,' or, again to use 
a good old English word which we have now let go, 
a 'scattering.' Aristotle notes that this, a too 
great prodigality in the use of money, is the ear- 

* Thus, in the Adelphi of Terence (iv. ^\ one having spoken 
of a youth *luxu 'perdiium^ proceeds: ' 

Ipsa si cupiat Salus, 
bervare prorsus non potest hane familiam. 

No doubt in the Greek original from which Terence translated this 
comedy, there was a play here on the word Ikcorros, which the ab- 
sence of the yerb *s«lyare* from the Latin language has hindered 
Terence from preserving. 



KSW TESTAMENT. 85 

liest meaning of aatorlay giving this as its definition 
{Etkic Nic. iv. 1. 3) ; daoDrla ianv inreplSoXr) irepi 
'XprifjMTa. The word forms part of his ethical ter- 
minology; the iXevOepio^j or the truly liberal man, 
is with him one who keeps the golden mean be- 
tween the two Sicpa, namely, aataria on one side^ 
and av€\€vO€pla or stinginess, on the other. And it 
is in this view o{a<rwla that Plato {Pol. viii. 560 e\ 
when he names the various catachrestic terms, ac- 
cording to which men call their vices by the names 
of the virtues which they caricature, makes them 
style these acomia^ fieyaXowpeTreui^ It is with the 
word at this stage of its meaning that Plutarch 
joins TToXurAeta {De Apotheg. Cat 1). 

But it is easy to see, and Aristotle does not fail 
to note, that one who is aaorro^: in this sense of 
spending too much, of laying out his expenditure 
on a more magnificent scheme than his means will 
warrant, slides too easily under the fatal infiuence 
of flatterers, and of all those temptations with which 
he has surrounded himself, into a spending on his 
own lusts and appetites of that with which he parts 
so easily, laying it out for the gratification of his 
own sensual desires ; and that thus a new thought 
finds its way into the word, so that it indicates not 
only one of a too expensive, but also and chiefiy, 

* Qumtilian {Inti. yiii 86): Pro loxuriH liberalitas didtar. 



86 STNONYMS OF THE 

of a dissolute, debauched, profligate manner of liv- 
ing ; the German ' liiderlich.' These are his words 
{Ethic. JVio. iv. 1. 36) : Sto koI aKoXatrrot. a\n&v 
\t&v aaon(ov\ elatv ol iroTsXai* €V)(€p&9 yhp ivaXi- 
a-Kovres /cal el^ r^9 aicoXaaia^ SaTTCunjpoi eiai, /cal Sui 
TO fjbf) TTpo^ TO mKov ^p, 7rpo9 T^y ^Sov€t9 airoKXi' 
vovaip. Here he gives the reason of what he has 
stated before: tov9 dxpareis teal els ascoXcurlav 5a- 
iravripoxf^ aaanov^ KoXovfiev. 

In this sense aaonla is used in the New Testa- 
ment ; as we find aa<iyriai and KpaviraKcu (Herodian, 
ii. 5) joined elsewhere together. It will of cora^e 
at once be felt that the two meanings will often run 
into one another, and that it will be hardly possible 
to keep them strictly asunder. Thus see the various 
examples of the aaayro^j and of da-corla, which 
Athenseus (iv. 69 — 67) gives ; they are sometimes 
rather of one kind, sometimes of the other. « The 
waster of his goods will be very often a waster 
of everything besides, will lay waste himself — his 
time, his faculties, his powers ; and, we may add, 
uniting the active and passive meanings of the word, 
will be himself laid waste ; he loses himself, and is 
lost. 

There is a difference in ao-eXyeta, a word the 
derivation of which is wrapped in much obscurity ; 
some going so far to look for it as to Selge, a city 
of Pisidia, whose inhabitants were infiEunous for 



NEW TESTAMENT. 87 

llieir vices ; while others derive it from BiKrfeWj 
probably the same word as the German * schwel- 
gen.' Of more frequent use than aacoTia in the 
New Testament, it is by us generally rendered ' las- 
c^viousness ' (Mark vii. 22 ; 2 Cor, xii, 21 ; Gal. y. 
19 ; Eph. iv. 19 ; 1 Pet. iv. 8 ; Jude 4) ; though 
sometimes * wantonness' (Rom. xiii, 13; 2 Pet. ii. 
18) ; as in the Yulgate either by ^ impudicitia ' or 
^ luxuria.' If our translators or the Latin intended 
by these renderings to express exclusively impuri- 
ties and lusts of the flesh, they have certainly given 
to the word too narrow a meaning. The aaiX/yeuij 
which it will be observed is not grouped with 
fleshly lusts, in the catalogue of sins at Mark vii. 
21, 22, is best described as petulance, or wanton in- 
solence ; being somewhat stronger than the Latin 
* protervitas,' though of the same nature, more 
nearly ^ petulantia.' The oo-eXyjJ?, as Passow ob- 
serves, is very closely allied to the v^purriKo^ and 
oKoKaaro^^ being one who acknowledges no re- 
straints, who dares whatsoever his caprice and wan- 
ton insolence suggest* Ncme, of course, would 
* deny that aa-iX/yeta may display itself in acts of what 
we call ^ lasciviousness ; ' for there are no worse dis- 

^Thus Witsius (MdeL Leid p. 466) observes: &<rfXyciar dioi 
posse innnem turn ingenii, quam momm proterviam, petnlantiam, 
lasciTiam, qxm ab iEschine opponitur rg /AvrpiSniTi koX c»^povinrg. 



88 . SYNOKYMS OF THE 

plays of i}l3fm than in these ; but still it is their 
petulance, their insolence, which causes them to 
deserve this name ; and of the two renderings of 
the word which we have made, * wantonness ' seems 
to me the preferable, standing as it does, by the 
double meaning which it has, in a remarkable 
ethical connexion with the wcwxi which we now are 
considering. 

In a multitude of passages the notion of lasci- 
viousness is altogether absent from the word. Thus 
Demosthenes, making mention of the blow which 
Meidias had given him, characterises it as in keep- 
ing with the known aaeX/yeia of the man {Con. Meid. 
§14). Elsewhere he joins hetnrorucw and aa€sr/m, 
aaeX/ym and irpoirerm* As aaikyeui Plutarch 
characterises a like outrage on the part of Alcibi- 
ades, committed against an honourable citizen of 
Athens {Alcib. 8) ; indeed, the whole picture which 
he draws of Alcibiades is the full-length portrait 
of an aae'Xr/ri^, Josephus ascribes aaeky^ut and 
fjMvia to Jezebel, daring, as she did, to build a tem- 
ple of Baal in the Holy City itself {AnU. viii, 13. 
1) ; and the same to a Soman soldier, who, being 
on guard at the Temple during the Passover, pro- 
voked by an act of grossest indecency a tumult, in 
which great multitudes of lives were lost {AnU. xx. 
5. 8). And for other passages, helpfril to a fixing 
of the true meaning of aaiXyeuiy see 3 Mace. ii. 26 • 



JM1CW TBBTAMSNT. 89 

Polybiufl, viii. 14. 1 ; Eusebius, H. E. v. 1, 26 ; and 
the quotations given in Wetstein's Ifew Testament, 
vol. i. p. 588. It, then, and aaoiyria are clewrly dis- 
tinguishable ; the fundamental notion of acrtoria 
being wastefiilness and riotous excess ; of oaiKyem, 
lawless insolence and wanton caprice. 



§xvii. — 0i*ffo>v(Oy S/irrofiai^ '^Xatfxiw, 

We are sometimes enabled, by the help of an 
accurate synonymous distinction, at once to reject 
as untenable some interpretation of a passage of 
Scripture, which might, but for this, have main- 
tained itself as at least a possible explanation of it. 
Thus is it with Heb. xii. 18 : " For ye are not come 
xmto the mount that might he touched '' {^'KaffH&- 
fih^ ipei). Many interpreters have seen allusion 
in these words to Ps. civ. 82 : " He touoheth the 
hills and they smoke ;" and to the fact that, at the 
giving of the Law, God did descend upon mount 
Binai, which " was altogether on a smoke, because 
the Lord descended upon it " (Exod. xix. 18). But, 
not to say that in such case we should expect a 
perfect, as in the following K€/cavfiev^j still more 
decisively against this is the fact that '^\a<l>dG) is 
never used in the sense of so handling an object as 



90 SYNOJnrMS of the 

to exercise a moulding, modifying influence upon it, 
but only to indicate a feeling of its surface (Luke 
xxiv. 39 ; 1 John i. 1) ; often such a feeling as is 
made with the intention of learning its conrposition 
(Gen. xxvii. 12, 21, 22) ; while not seldom the word 
signifies no more than a feeling for or afteft an ob- 
ject, without any actual coming in contact with it 
at all. It is used continually to express a groping 
in the dark (Job v. 14), or of the blind (Isa. lix. 10 ; 
Gen. xxvii. 12 ; Deut. xxviii. 29 ; Judg. xvi. 26) ; 
and tropically, Acts xvii. 27; with which we may 
compare Plato, PhcBd, 99 I : 'slrrj\a<f>a>vT€^ &<nr€p iv 
aKoret. The '^Xaffxiyfievop opo^^ in this passage, is 
beyond a doubt the ' mons folpdhilis : ' " Te are 
not come," the Apostle would gay, " to any material 
mountain, like Sinai, capable, as such, of being 
touched and handled; not in this sense, to the 
mountain that may hefelt^ but to the heavenly Jeru- 
salem," to a voTfTov 5/)09, and not to an alaOnjTov. 

The so handling of any object as to exert a 
modifying influence upon it, the French ' manier,' 
as distinguished from ^ toucher,' the German ' betas- 
ten,' as distinguished from ^beriihren,' would be 
either &irT€<rdai * or diyydvetv. Of these the first 
is stronger than the second; airreadai (— 'con- 

^ In the passage aUaded to already, Ps. civ. 82, tae words <^ 
the Septaagint are, 6 avT6fi€ros rvv 6p4ofrt koU KaTwiCvyrau 



NEW TESTAMENT. 91 

trectare'), than diyydveiv (Ps. civ. 15 ; 1 John v. 18), 
as appears plainly in a passage of Xenophon {Cyrop. 
i. 8. 5), where the child Cyrus, rebuking his grand- 
father's delicacies, says: oTt ae 6p&^ orav fiev rov 
apTov ayfrrjy eh ovSip ttjv X^^P^ airo^oofMevoVj orav Se 
TovTxov Tivb<i dtyp^, eifOif^ awoKodaiprf rrjv ^eZ/oa eh 
TO, yetpofjLaicrpa^ co? irdvv dx^ofievo^. Our Version, 
then, has just reversed the true order of the words, 
when, at Col. ii. 21, it translates fif) o^, fiffSk 76U077, 
fiffSk Oiyrj^y " Touch not, taste not, hamUe not'' 
The first and last prohibitions should, in our Eng- 
lish, just have changed their places, and the pas- 
sage should stand, " Hcmdle not, taste not, Umck 
not." How much more strongly will then come 
out the ever ascending scale of superstitious pro- 
hibition among the false teachers at Colosse. 
' Handle not ' is not sufficient ; they forbid to 
* taste' and, lastly, even to touch those things 
from which, according to their notions, unclean- 
ness might be derived. Beza well : Verbum Ov^eiv 
a verbo airreaffai sig est distinguendum, ut decres- 
cente semper oratione intelligatur crescere super- 
stitio. 



SYNONYMS OF THE 



§ xviii. — ircCKuf^ev^ala, ava/ealvaxn^. 

^Avayhnnjin^y a word frequent enough in the 
Greek Fathers (see Snicer, ITies. s. v.), no where 
occnrs in the New Testament ; although the verb 
dvayevpoG} twice (1 Pet. i. 13, 23). Did we meet 
ava/yevpffo'i^ there, it would furnish a still closer 
synonym to iraXiyyeveaia than the avcucaivaxn^y 
which I propose to bring into comparison with it : 
yet that also is sufficiently close to justify the 
attempt at once to compare and distinguish them. 
It will be no small gain to the practical theologian, 
to the minister of God's word, to be clear in his own 
mind in respect of the relation between the two. 

na\tyyev€<Tla naturally demands first to be con- 
sidered. This is one of the many words which the 
Gospel found, and, so to speak, glorified ; enlarged 
the borders of its meaning; lifted it up into a 
higher sphere ; made it the expression of far deeper 
thoughts, of far greater truths, than any of which 
it had been the vehicle before. It was, indeed, al- 
ready in use ; but, as the Christian new-birth was 
not till after Christ's birth ; as men were not new- 
bom, till Christ was bom (John i. 12) ; as their re- 
generation did not go before, but only followed his 
generation ; so the word could not be used in this 



NEW TE8TA1IBNT. W 

its higheBt, most mysterious sense, till that great 
mystery of the birth of the Son of God into our 
world had actually found place. And yet it is ex- 
ceedingly interesting to trace these its subordinate, 
and, as they proved, preparatory uses. Thus, by 
the Pythagoreans, as is well known, the word was 
employed to express the transmigration of souls ; 
their reappearance in new bodies being called tto- 
Xtyyevea-ia : Plutarch, De £su Car. i. 7 ; ii. 6 ; De 
Isid. et Osir. c. 35 : ^OaipiZo^ al apafiuoaeis kcu ira^ 
Tuyyev^a-ud : De JEi op. Del^. 9 : dwofiidxret^ /col 
TrdKiyyepeaiaL Among the Stoics the word set 
forth the periodic renovation of the earth, when, 
budding and blossoming in the spring-time, it woke 
up from its winter sleep, nay, might be said even to 
have, revived from its winter death: Marc. Anton. 
iL 1 ; Ttfp irepioSiKijv iraXtyyepeaiav r&v oXmv. Ci- 
cero {Ad Attic, vi. 6) calls his restoration to his 
dignities and honours, after his return from exile, 
' hanc TraTuyyeveaiav nostram ; ' with which compare 
Philo, Zeg. ad Cai. 41. Josephus {Antt. xi. 3. 9) 
characterises the restoration of the Jewish nation 
after the Captivity, as ttjv dvoKTrja-u/ /eai TraKiyye- 
veaiav rfj^ irarplSo^. And, to cite one passage more, 
Olympiodorus, a later Platonist, styles memory a 
revival or iraKiyyeveala of knowledge (Journal dee 
Sa/va/nSf 1834, p. 488): iroKi^eveaia t^? yvdxreti^ 
icmv fi dvdfAinjai^. 



94 SYNONYMS OF THE 

No one who has carefully watched and weighed 
the uses of 'rroKuffeveala just adduced, and similar 
ones which might be added, but will note that 
while it has in them all the meaniug of a recovery, 
a change for the better, a revival, yet it never 
reaches, or even approaches, the depth of meaning 
which it has acquired in Christian language, and 
which will now claim a little to be considered. The 
word occurs never in the Old Testament {ttoKiv yl- 
vea-Oat at Job xiv. 14), and only twice in the New 
(Matt xix. 28 ; Tit. iii. 6), but there (which is most 
remarkable) apparently in different meanings. In 
St. Matthew it seems plainly to refer to the new- 
birth of the whole creation, the aTroAraTaarao**? irdv- 
Twv (Acts iii. 21), which shall be when the Son of 
Man hereafter comes in his glory; while in St. 
Paul's use of the word the allusion is plainly to the 
new-birth of the single soul, which is now evermore 
finding place in the waters of baptism. Shall we 
then acquiesce in the conclusion that it is used in 
diverse meanings ; that there is no common bond 
which binds the two nses of it together? By no 
means ; all laws of language are violated by any 
such supposition. He fact is, rather, that the word 
by our Lord is used in a wider, by his Apostle in a 
narrower meaning. Hey are two circles of mean- 
ing, one more comprehensive than the other, but 
their centre is the same. The iraTuyyevea-la of which 



NEW IICSTAMENT* 95 

Scripture speaks, begins with the fiiKpoKoaiio^ of 
single souls ; but it does not end there ; it does not 
cease its effectual working till it has embraced the 
whole fjM/cpoKocfio^ of the universe. The first seat 
of the TroKiyyepeaia is the soul of man ; but, begin- 
ning there, and establishing its centra there, it ex- 
tends in ever widening circles. And, first, to his 
body ; the day of resurrection will be the day of 
wa'Kiyy€V€<ria for it ; so that those Fathers had a 
certain, though only a partial, right, as many as in- 
terpreted the word at Matt. xix. 28, as though it had 
been equivalent, and only equivalent, to amoracr*?, 
and who, as a consequence, themselves continually 
used it as a synonym for ' resurrection ' (Eusebius, 
Sist Ecd. V. 1. 58 ; Suicer, Thea. s. v.). Doubtless 
the word there includes, or presupposes, the resur- 
rection, but it also embraces much more. Beyond 
the day of resurrection, or it may be contempora- 
neous with it, a day will come, when all nature shall 
put off its soiled work-day garments, and clothe it- 
self in its holy-day attire, the day of the "restitu- 
tion of all things " (Acts iii. 21) ; of the new heaven 
and the new earth (Eev. xxi. 1) ; the day of which 
Paul speaks, as one in expectation of which all 
creation is groaning and travailing until now (Kom. 
viii. 21 — ^23). Man is the present subject of the 
ira7uyy€P€aiay and of tiie wondrous transfcwrmation 
which it implies ; but in liiat davitw^'^^ i--,,^ ,'^, 



96 SYNONYMS OF TS& 

eluded within its limits the whole world, of which 
man is the central figure : and here is the reconci- 
liation of. the two passages, in one of which it is 
spoken of as pertaining to the single soul, in the 
other to the whole redeemed creation. They allude 
both, to the same fact, but in different epochs and 
stages of its development. 

But now to consider avaicalvmat,^^ the relation m 
which it stands to TraXtyyei^eorta, and the exact limits 
of the meaning of each. This word, which is pecu- 
liar to the Greek of the New Testament, occurs 
there also only twice — -once in connexion with wia- 
Xiyyeveaia (Tit. iii. 5), and again Eom. xii. 2 ; but 
we have Uie verb avetfccuvSa), which also is an exclu- 
sively New Testament form, at 2 Oor. iv. 16 ; Col. 
iii. 10 ; and the more classical apa/caivl^ofy Bfeb. vi. 
6, from which the nouns, frequent in the Greek 
Fathers, avaiccuvi,a-ji6<: and dvcucalviai^y are more im- 
mediately drawn; we have also avapeoco (Eph. iv. 
23) ; all in the same uses. It would be impossible 
better to eipress the relation in which the two 
stand to each other, than has been already done in 
our Collect for Christmas day, in which we pray 
" that we being regenerate," in other words, having 
been already made the subjects of the vaXnyyepea-ioj 
" may daily be renewed by the Holy Spirit," — may 
continually know tibe ayafcaipaxri,^: IIvevfjMTo^ 'Ayiov. 
In this Collect, uttering, as so many others of them 



NKW TESTAMENT. 97 

do, profound theological truth in its most accurate 
forms, the ' regeneration ' is spoken of as past, as 
having found place once for all, while the ^ renewal ' 
or ' renovation ' is that which ought now to be daily 
proceeding — this avaKcUvcoac^ being that gradual 
restoration of the Divine image, which is going for- 
ward in him who, through the new birth, has come 
under the transforming* powers of the world to 
come. It is called " the renewal of the Holy Ghoaiy^ 
inasmuch as He is the * causa efficiens ' by whom 
alone this renewal, this putting on of the new man, 
is carried forward. 

We see then, of the two, that they are indisso- 
lubly bound together — that the second is the follow- 
ing up, the consequence, the completion of the first; 
yet, for all this, that they are not to be confounded. 
The iraXiyyei/eaia is that great free act of God's 
mercy and power, whereby He causes the sinner to 
pass out of the kingdom of darkness into that of 
light, out of death into life ; it is the avtadev yevrnj' 
6^v€U #f John iii. 3 ; the yevvrfirfvai iic Oeov of 1 
John V. 4, sometimes called, therefore, deoyepeaia 

^ Mcroftop^ovotfc rp iivaiccup^fftt rov yo6f. Bom. xii 2. The 
striking words of Seneca, Ep. 6, InteUigo me emendari non tan- 
turn, Bed tranafigurariy are far too big to express any benefits 
which he could have gotten from his books of philosophy ; they 
reach out after blessings to be obtained, not in the schools of npieni, 
but only in the Church of the living God. 
5 



98 SYNONYMS OF THE 

by Greek theologians ; the yewrjdrjvai ix <nropa<i 
dipddpTov of 1 Pet. i. 23. In it, — not in the prepa- 
rations for it, but in the act itself, — the subject of 
it is passive, even as the child has nothing to do 
with its own birth. But it is very different as res- 
pects the dvaKaivaxTv^. This is the gradual conform- 
ing of the man more and more to that new spiritual 
world into which he has been introduced, and in 
which he now lives and moves ; the restitution of 
the Divine image ; and in all this, so far from be- 
ing passive, he must be a fellow-worker with God. 
That was ' regeneratio,' this is ^ renovatio.' They 
must not be separated, but neither may they be con- 
founded.* What infinite confusions, conflicts, scan- 
dals, obscurations of God's truth on this side and 
on that, have arisen from the one course as from the 
other. 



§ xix. — €U<r)(vvrj, al8<0<:, • 

These was a time when the Greek language pos- 
sessed only the word alSa><: ; which then occupied 
the two regions of meaning afterward divided be- 

■ Gerhard (Loc. Theoll. xxi T. 113): Renovatio, licet a regene- 
ratioDe proprie et specialiter acceptft. distinguatur, mdividuo ta- 
men et perpetuo nexu cum e& est conjuncta. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 99 

tween it and at<rxvv7). AlSd^ had at that time the 
same duplicity of meaning as is latent in the Latin 
'pndor,' in our own 'shame.' Thus in Homer 
alayyvrf never occurs, while sometimes, as M. v. 
T87, at&»9 is used on occasions when altrxyvfj would, 
in later Greek, have necessarily been employed : 
elsewhere Homer employs at&»9 in that sense which, 
at a later period, it vindicated as exclusively its own. 
And even Thucydifles (i. 84), in a difficult and 
doubtful passage where both words occur, is by 
many considered to have employed them as equi- 
pollent said convertible. Generally, however, in 
the Attic period of the language, the words were 
not accounted synonymous. Ammonius formally 
distinguishes them in a philological, as the Stoics 
in an ethical, interest ; and almost every passage 
in which either word occurs is an evidence of the 
real difference existing between them. Yet the 
distinction has not always been quite successfully 
seized. 

Thus it has been sometimes said that at&»9 is 
the ehame which hinders one from doing a disho- 
nourable thing ; altryyvrj is the disgrace^ outward or 
inward, which follows on having done it (Luke xiv. 
9). This distinction, while it has its truth, is yet 
not an exhaustive one ; and if we were thereupon 
to assume that al<r)(vvrf was thus only retrospective, 
the consequence of things unworthily done, it would 



100 SYNOiinrMS of the 

be an erroneous one ; * for it would be abundantly 
easy to show that aurxvprj is continually used to ex- 
press that feeling which leads to shun what is un- 
worthy out of a prospective anticipation of disho- 
nour. Thus one definition (Plat. Def. 416) makes 
it (f>6fio'i iiri nrptahoKUi aho^ia^ : and Aristotle in- 
cludes the future in his comprehensive definition 
{Rhet. ii. 6) : earco H). alaxvprfy Xuirr) rt? KoiX rapaxh 
Trepl ra ek aSo^iav (f>a(,p6fi€Pa <f>€p€iv r&v kokwPj fj 
irapoPTcoVj fj yeyoi/oTO)!/, ^ fieWovrcov. In this sense 
as 'fuga dedecoris' it is used Ecclus. iv. 21 ; by 
Plato, Gorg. 492 a; by Xenophon, Anab. iii. 1. 10. 
In this last passage, which runs thus, <f>o^ovfj,€voi Si 
rov oBbv Koi aKOPT€s o/ia>9 ot ttoXXoI S^^ altryyvTiv xaX 
aXKriKoiv xal Kvpov awfjKo\ov0fj(raVf Xenophon im- 
plies that while he and others, for more reasons 
than one, disapproved the going forward with Cyrus 
to assail his brother's throne, they yet were now 
ashamed to draw back. • 

This much of truth the distinction drawn above 
possesses, that at&o? (-= Werecundia,' see Oicero, 
Hep. V. 4) is the nobler word and implies the nobler 
motive : in it is implied an innate moral repugnance 

' There is the same onesidedness, though exactly on the otber 
side, in Cicero's definition of * pudor/ which he makes merely ppo- 
spective : Pudor metus rerum turpium, et ingenua quaedam timidi- 
tas, dedeeus fiigiens, laudemque consectans ; but Ovid writer 
Irruity et nostrum vulgat clamore pudorem. 



NEW -nSSTAMBNT. 101 

to the doing of the dishonotirable act, which moral 
repugnance scarcely or at all exists in the alax^vrj. 
Insure the man restrained only by aiaxvvr) against 
the outward disgrace which he fears may accom- 
pany or follow his act, and he will refrain from it 
no lopger. It is only, as Aristotle teaches, wepl 
oBo^lm f^vraaia : its seat, therefore, as he goes on 
to show, is not properly in the moral sense of him 
that entertains it, in his consciousness of a right 
which has been, or would be, violated by his act, 
but only in his apprehension of other persons who 
are, or might be, privy to its violation. Let this 
apprehension be removed, and the al(rxypv ceases ; 
while alSok finds its motive in its own moral being, 
and not in any other ; it implies reverence for the 
good as good, and not merely as that to which 
honour and reputation are attached. Thus it is 
often connected with €if\d/3eta' (Heb. xii. 28), the 
reverence before God, before His majesty. His ho- 
liness, which will induce a carefulness not to offend, 
the German * Scheu ; ' so Plutarch, Cces. 14 ; Conj. 
PrcBc. 4cl ; Philo, Leg. ad Cm, 44 ; often also with 
S€09, as Plato, Euth. 126 c ; with evfcoaiila, Xeno- 
phon, Cyrcfp. viii. 1. 33 ; with evra^ia and Koafivd-rq^y 
Plutarch, Cces, 4; with ae^vorri^y Conj. Prcec. 26. 
To sum up all, we may say that alhm would always 
restrain a good man frc«n an unworthy act, while 
alrxivT) would sometimes restrain a bad one. 



102 SYNONYMS OF THE 



§ XX. — alSw^ <T(0(f>poavvfi, 

Thebe words occur together at 1 Tim. ii. 9 ; the 
only other places where aaxf^poavpr) occurs being 
Acts xxvi. 25 ; and 1 Tim. ii. 15, where alSw and 
€r<o<f>po<Tvvfi are urged by the Apostle as together 
constituting the truest adornment of a Christian 
woman. If the distinction drawn in § 19 be cor- 
rect, this one, which Xenophon, {Cyrop, viii. 1. 81) 
ascribes to Cyrus, between the words now under 
consideration, can hardly be allowed to stand: 
Scppet Se alSS> xal aaxfypoavvr^v r^Se, a>9 Tois fJih^ 
alhovfievovi ra iv rtp <f>av€p^ aia^it <l>€vyov7a^^ 
T0V9 Be adxfyi^ova^ kuI ra iv tg) a<f>{iv€t. On nei- 
ther side is it successful, for as on the one hand the 
at&»9 does not shun merely open and manifest base- 
nesses, however the ataxvvrj may do this, so, on the 
other side, the point of the ao}(f>poaijin) is altogether 
different from that here made, which, though true, 
is yet a mere accident of it. The opposite of a/co- 
Xaaia (Thucydides, iii. 37), it is properly the state 
of an entire command over our passions and desires, 
so that they receive no further allowance than that 
which the law and right reason admit and approve; 
Plato, Sym/p, 196 c: elvai, yap ofwXoyelrat crca^po* 
avvrf TO jcpareiv rihov&v koI emdvfii&vi, and in the 



NEW TESTAMENT* 103 

Chcmmdes he has dedicated a whole dialogue to 
the investigation of the exact force of the word. 
Aristotle, lih^t. i. 9 : aperri &' fiv vpo^ ri? '^S(mL<: 
rod awfiaTO^ ovT(a9 e'xpwriv^ w o pofio^ K€\€V€t>: cf. 
Plutarch, De Curios. 14 ; De Virt. Mar. 2 ; GryU. 
6: ^ flip ovv a'Ci}<f>poavvr} fipayirrri^ rt? iarlv hriBv- 
fii^v KoL Ta^9, avaipovaa fikv t^9 ivcicaJCTOv^ fcal 
ireptTTcL^, K(up& hk fcal fierpioTfjTi tcoa/iovcra ra^ dvay- 
KcUas : and Diogenes Laertius, iii. 57. 91. No single 
Latin word exactly represents it. Cicero, as he 
avows himself {Ticso. iii. 6 ; cf. v. 14), renders it 
now by * temperantia,' now by ' moderatio,' now by 
*modestia.' Soxfypoavvr) was a virtue which as- 
sumed more marked prominence in heathen ethics 
than it does in Christian ; not because more vlilue 
was attached to it there tlian with us ; but partly 
because it was there one of a much smaller com- 
pany of virtues, each of which therefore would sin- 
gly attract more attention ; but also in part because 
for as many as are " led by the Spirit," this condi- 
tionof self-command is taken up and transformed 
into a condition yet higher still, in which a man 
does not command himself, which is well, but, 
which is far better still, is commanded by God. 

In the passage already referred to (1 Tim. ii. 9), 
where it and alBdyi occur together, we shall best 
distinguish them thus, and the distinction will be 
capable of further application. If alSdt^ is the 



104 SYNONTMB OP THE 

* BhamefiMtness,' * or pudency, which shrinks from 
oyerpassmg the limits of womanly reserve and mod- 
esty, as well as from the dishonour which would 
justly attach thereto, a-m<l>poavpr) is that habitual 
inner self-government, with its constant rein on all 
the passions and desires, which would hinder the 
temptation to this from, arising, or at aU events from 
arising in such strength as should overbear the 
checks and hindrances which alSa^ opposed to it. 

' It is a pity that 'ahamefast' and 'shame&ttness,' by which 
last word our translators rendered cft^cinni here^ should hare 
been corrupted in modern use to *8hame/ace(f ' and ' shame/octfi- 
9MM.* The words are properly of the same formation as 'stead- 
fast^* ' steadfastness^' 'soothfast^* 'soothfastness,' and those good 
old English words, now lost to ns, *root£ast^' and < root&stness.' 
As by 'rootfast* onr fathers understood that which was firm and 
faH by its root^ so by ' shamefost ' in like manner, that which was 
established and made fast by (an honourable) sharM, To change 
this into 'shame/'ace>(i* is to allow all the meaning and force of the 
word to run to the surftuse, to leave us ethically a &r inferior word. 
It is yery inexcusable that all modem reprints of the Authorised 
Version should have given in to this corruption. So long as 
merely the spelling of a word is concerned, this may very weU be 
allowed to fall in with modern use ; we do not want them to print 

* Sonne* or *marveile,* when every body now spells *son* and 

* marvel.* But when the true form, indeed the life^ of a word is 
affected by the alterations which it has undergone, then I cannot 
but consider that subsequent editors were bound to adhere to the 
first edition of 1611, which should have been considered authori* 
tative and exemplary for all that followed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 105 



§ xxi. — avpa>j iXxvcj. 

These words differ, and with differences not the- 
ologicaUy unimportant. We best represent these 
their differences in English when we render avpetv^ 
* to drag,' cTucveiVj * to draw.' In avpeiv, as in our 
^ drag,' there lies always the notion of force, as when 
Plutarch {De Lib. Ed, 8) speaks of the headlong 
course of a river, iravra avpcov koI irdvra irapa<f>i-' 
p<Dv : and it will follow, that where persons, and not 
merely things, are in question, it will involve the 
notion of violence (Acts viii. 3 ; xiv. 19 ; xvii. 6). 
But in e\/cvetv this notion of force or violence does 
not of necessity lie. That, indeed, such is often 
implied in it, is plain enough (Acts xvi. 19 ; xxi. 30 ; 
Jam. ii. 6 ; and cf. II. xi. 258 ; xxiv. 52, 417 ; 
Aristophanes, Equit. 710 ; Euripides, Troad. 70 : 
Ala<; elkKe KacavZpav ^ia)\ but not always, any 
more than in our ' draw,' which we use of a mental 
and moral attraction, or in the Latin 'traho,' as 
witness the language of the poet, Trahit sua quem- 
que voluptas. Thus Plato, Pol. vi. 494 e: iav 
ekKrjTOA, irp6<$ (f>i\oao<f>Lav. 

Only by keeping in mind this difference which 
there is between iXjcveiv and avpeiv, can we vindi- 
cate from erroneous interpretation two doctrinally 
5* 



106 SYNONYMS OF THE 

important passages in tlie Gospel of St. John. The 
lirst is xii. 32 ; '' I, if I be lifted up from the earth, 
will draw all men unto me " (7rdvTa<; iX/cvao)). But 
how does a crucified, and thus an exalted, Saviour 
draw all men imto Him ? Not by force, for the 
will is incapable of force, but by the divine attrac- 
tions of His love. Again He declares (vi. 4A): 
" No man can come to Me, except the Father which 
hath sent Me draw him " {eK/cuari ainov). Now as 
many as feel bound to deny any ' gratia irresisti- 
bilis,' which turns man into a mere machine, and 
by which, nolens volens, he is dragged to God, must 
at once allow that this iX/cvay can mean no more 
than the potent allurements of love, the attracting 
of men by the Father to the Son ; as at Jeremiah 
xxxi. 3, " With loving-kindness have 1 drawn thee " 
{eiXicvad ere), with which compare Cant. i. 3. 4. Did 
we find avpeiv on either of these occasions (not that 
I believe this would have been possible), the asser- 
tors of a ' gratia irresistibilis ' ^ might then urge the 

' The excellent words of Augustine on this last passage, him- 
self sometimes adduced as an upholder of this, may be here quoted 
{In Ev, Joh Tract xxvL 4): Nemo venit ad me, nisi quern Pater 
adtraxerit. Noli te cogitare invitum trahi; trahitur animus et 
amore. Nee timere debemus ne ab hominibus qui verba perpen- 
dunt, et a rebus maxime divinis ^ntelligendis longe remoti sunt, in 
hoc S«ripturarum sanctarum evangelico verbo forsitan reprehenda- 
mur, et dicatur nobis, Quomodo yoluntate, credo, si trahorf Eigo 
dico: Parum est yoluntate, etiam yoluptate traheris, Porro si 



NEW TESTAMENT. 107 

passages as leaving no room for any other meaning 
but theirs ; but not as they now stand- 
in agreement with this which has been said, in 
€\kv€lv is much more predominantly the sense of 
a drawing to a certain point, in avpew merely of 
dragging after one ; thus Lucian {De M&rc. Cond. 
8), likening a man to a fish already hooked and 
dragged through the water, describes him as avpi- 
fievov Koi irpo^ avdy/cijv ayofievov. Not seldom 
there will lie in avpeiv the notion of this dragging 
being upon the ground, inasmuch as that will trail 
upon the ground {avpfiaj avpSrjv) which is forcibly 
dragged along with no will of its own. A com- 
parison of the uses of the two words at John xxi. 
6, 8, 11, will be found entirely to bear out the dis- 
tinction which has been here traced. In the first 
and last of these verses ikfcveiv is used ; for they 
both express a dra/wing of the net to a certcmy 
pamt; by the disciples to themselves in the ship, 
by Peter to himself upon the shore. But at ver. 8 
(rvp€iv is employed ; for nothing is there intended 
but the dragging of the net which had been fastened 
to the ship, after it through the water. Our Ver- 

poetffi dicere lieoit, Trabit sua qnemque voluptas ; non neceasitaa^ 
sed Yoluptas ; non obligatio, sed delectatio ; quanto fortius nos 
dicere debemus, trahi hominem ad Christum, qui delectatur veri 
tate, delectatur beatitudine, delectatur justjti&, 4^^^^^^^^ sempi* 
ternft. yitft, quod totum Gbristus est? 



108 SYNONYMS OF THE 

sion, it will be seen, has maintained the distinction; 
so too the German of De Wette, by aid of * Ziehen ' 
(=« i\KV€iv)y and * nachschleppen ' (— = <Tvp€iv)y but 
neither the Vulgate, nor Beza, which both have 
forms of * traho ' throughout. 



§xxii. — 6\6/c\rjpo^j rikeio^. 

These words occur together, though their order 
is reversed, at Jam. i. 4, — "perfect and entire;'' 
oXoKkrjpo^f only once besides (1 Thess. v. 28), and 
the substantive oXo/ckrfpta, used however not in an 
ethical but a physical sense, also once. Acts iii. 16 ; 
cf Isa. i. 6. 0\6K\f)po9 signifies first, as its deriva- 
tion implies, that which retains all which was allot- 
ted to it at the first, which thus is whole and entire 
in all its parts, to which nothing necessary for its 
completeness is wanting. Thus unhewn stones, in- 
asmuch as they have lost nothing in the process of 
shaping and polishing, are oXoKkqpou (Deut. xxvii. 
6 ; 1 Mace. iv. 47) ; so too perfect weeks are k^hoiJM- 
Se? oKoKkrjpoi (Deut. xvi. 9) ; and in Lucian, PhUops. 
8, iv okoKkriptp SipfiaTLy Mn a whole skin.' At the 
next step in the word's use we find it employed to 
express that integrity of body, with nothing redun- 
dant, nothing deficient (ll^ev. xxi. 17 — 23), which 



NEW TESTAMENT. 109 

was required of the Leyitical priests as a condition 
of their ministering at the altar, which was needftil 
also in the sacrifices they offered. In both these 
senses Josephns uses it, Antt. iii. 12. 2 ; as continu- 
ally PhilOy with whom it is the standing word for 
this integrity of the priests and of the sacrifice, to 
the necessity of which he often recurs, seeing in it, 
and rightly, a mystical significance, and that these 
are okoKKrjpot Ovaiai 6\o/eKijp^ 0e&: thus De Viet, 
2 ; De Yict. Off, 1 : oT^/cXrjpov leal nravreKo^^ fuofuov 
ofAeroxop : De Agricul. 29 ; De Cherub. 28 ; cf. Plato, 
Legg. 759 c. The word in the "next step of its his- 
tory resembles very much the * integer ' and ^ integ- 
ritas' of the Latins. Like these words, it was 
transferred from bodily to mental and moral entire- 
ness. The only approach to this use of 6\6/e\f}po^ 
in the Septuagint is Wisd. xv. 3, o\6/e\r)po<; SiKaio- 
avvf) 'y. but in an interesting and important passage 
in the PhcBdrus of Plato (250 c), it is twice used to 
express the perfection of man before the fall; I 
mean, of course, the fall as Plato contemplated it ; 
when men were as yet oXo/eXrjpoi, koI airaOei^ Ka/c&Vj 
and to whom as such o\6/c\r)pa ^da-fiara were 
vouchsafed, as contrasted with those weak partial 
glimpses of the Eternal Beauty, which is all whereof 
the greater part of men ever now catch sight ; cf. 
his Tvm€BU8y 44 c. 'OT^KXrjpo^^ then, is an epithet 
applied to a person or a thing that is * omnibus nu- 



ilO SYNONYMS OF THE 

mens absolutus ; ' and the iv firjievl Xeiirofievotj 
which at Jam. i. 4 follows it, must be taken as the 
epexegesis of the word. 

TiXeu)^ is a word of various applications, but 
all of them referable to the rdXo^y which is its 
ground. They in a natural sense are reXei^oi^ who 
are adult, having reached the full limit of statuxe, 
strength, and mental power appointed to them, who 
have in these respects attained their riktyiy as dis- 
tinguished from the veot or waffie?, j'^oung men or 
boys ; so Plato, Zegff. 929 c. St. Paul, when he 
employs the word in an ethical sense, does it con- 
tinually with this image of full completed growth, as 
contrasted with infancy and childhood, underiying 
his use, the riXeioi being by him set over against 
the v7]7rtoi iv Xpi.aT& (1 Cor. ii. 6 ; xiv. 20 ; Eph. iv. 
13, 14 ; Phil. iii. 15 ; Heb. v. 14), being in fact the 
7raT€/)€9 of 1 John ii. 13, 14, as distinct from the vect- 
Via/cot and waiSia. 'Nov is this application of the 
word to mark the religious growth and progress of 
men, confined to the Scriptm-e. The Stoics opposed 
the T€X.6«)9 in philosophy to the. Trpo/coTrrav, with 
which we may compare 1 Chron. xxv. 8, where the 
riT^^iot are set over against the fiavOdvovre^. With 
the heatlien, those also were called reKeioi, who had 
been initiated into the mysteries ; the same thought 
being at work here as in the giving of the title to 
riXemv to the Lord's Supper. This was so called, 



NEW TESTAMENT. Ill 

becaase in it was the fulness of Christian privilege, 
because there was nothing beyond it ; and the reKeiot 
of heathen initiation had their name in like manner, 
because those mysteries into which they were now 
introduced were the latest and crowning mysteries 
of alL 

It will be seen that there is a certain ambiguity 
in our word ' perfect,' which, indeed, it shares with 
Te\eio<s itself; this, namely, that they are both em- 
ployed now in a relative, now in an absolute sense ; 
for only out of this ambiguity could our Lord have 
said, " Be ye therefore perfect {riKeMi), as your 
Heavenly Father ispeTfect {ri\eio^)j Matt. v. 48 ; cf. 
xix» 21. The Christian shall be 'perfect,' yet not 
in the sense in which some of the sects preach the 
doctrine of perfection, who, preaching it, either 
mean nothing which they could not have eitpressed' 
by a word less liable to misunderstanding ; or mean 
something which no man in this life shall attain, 
and which he who affirms he has attained is deceiv- 
ing himself, or others, or both. He shall be ^ per- 
fect,' that is, seeking by the grace of God to be fully 
furnished and firmly established in the knowledge 
and practice of the things of God (Jam. iii. 2) ; not 
a babe in Christ to the end, " not always employed 
in the elements, and infant propositions and prac- 
tices of religion, but doing noble actions, well 
skilled in the deepest mysteries of faith and holi- 



112 SYNONYMS OF THE 

ness." * In this sense Paul claimed to be reXeio^j 
even while almost in the same breath he disclaimed 
the being rereXeuofiivo^ (Phil. iii. 12, 15). 

The distinction then is plain; the rikeio^ has 
reached his moral end^ that for which he was intend- 
ed ; namely, to be a man in Christ; (it is true indeed 
that, having reached this, other and higher ends 
open out before him, to have Christ formed in him 
more and more ;) the 6\6ie\rjpo^ has preserved, or, 
having lost, has regained, his comjpleteness. In the 
6\6K\ffp<yi no grace which ought to be i^ a Christian 
man is wanting ; in the reXewj^ no grace is merely in 
its weak imperfect beginnings, but all have reached 
a certain ripeness and maturity. 'OXoreXiJ?, which 
occurs once in the New Testament (1 Thess. v. 23 ; 
cf. Plutarch, Plac. Phil. v. 21), forms a certain con- 
necting link between the two, holding on to oKokX^- 
po^ by its first half, to ri\€io<: by its second. 



§ xxiii. — oriifMvo^, BidSfffia. 

The fact that our English word ' crown ' covers 
the meanings of both these words, must not lead us 

> On the sense in which * perfection * is demanded of the Chris- 
tian, there is a discussion at large by J. Taylor, Doctrine and Frae- 
iieeof Repentance, I 8. 40 — 66, from which these words in inverted 
commas are drawn. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 113 

to confoxind them. In German the first would often 
be translated * Kranz/ and only the second ^ Krone/ 
I indeed very much doubt whether anywhere in 
classical literature ari^xvifo^ is used of the kingly, or 
imperial crown. It is the crown of victory in the 
games, of civic worth, of military valour, of nuptial 
joy, of festal gladness — woven of oak, of ivy, of 
parsley, of myrtle, of olive, — or imitating in gold 
Hiese leaves or others — of flowers, as of violets or 
roses (see Athenaeus, xv. 9 — 38), but never, any more 
than ^corona' in Latin, the emblem and sign of 
royalty. The SiaStffia was this (Xenophon, Cyrop. 
viii. 3. 13 ; Plutarch, De Frat. Am, 18), being pro- 
perly a linen band or fillet, 'taenia' or * fascia' 
(Curtius, iii. 3), encircling the brow ; so that no lan- 
guage is more common than jrepiriffipiu SuiSfffui to 
signify the assumption of royal dignity (Polybius, 
V. 57. 4 ; Josephus, Antt. xii. 10. 1), even as in Latin 
in like manner the ^ diadema ' is alone the * insigne 
regium ' (Tacitus, Armal. xv. 29). 

A passage bringing out very clearly the distinc- 
tion between the two words occurs in Plutarch, Cobs. 
61. It is the well known occasion on which Anto- 
nius offers Caesar the kingly crown, which is de- 
scribed as SuiSrf/Ma <rr€if>dv(p Bd<f)pij^ irepttreTrXeyfiipov : 
here the aTi(f>avo<: is only the garland or laureate 
wreath, with which the true diadem was enwoven. 
Indeed, according to Cicero {PhU. ii. 84), Caesar 



114 SYNomrMs of the 

was already ' coronatus ' = etrre^vtafihof; (this he 
would have been as consul), when the offer was 
made. Plutarch at the same place describes the 
statues of Caesar to have been, by those who would 
have suggested his assumption of royalty, hui^fux- 
GLV avaBeScfiivoi, ^aaCkiKok. And it is out of the 
observance of this distinction that the passage in 
Suetonius {Cobs. 79), containing another version of 
the same incident, is to be explained. One places 
on his statue ' coronam lauream candidS fascia prse- 
ligatam ; ' on which tlie tribunes of the people com- 
mand to be removed, not the ^ corona,' but the ' fas- 
cia ; ' this being the diadem, and that in which alone 
the traitorous suggestion that he should be pro- 
claimed kiiig, was contained. 

How accurately the words are discriminated in 
the Septuagint may be seen by comparing in the 
First Book of Maccabees, in which only ScdSrjfia 
occurs with any frequency, the passages in which 
this word is employed (such as i. 9 ; vi. 15 ; viii. 
14 ; xi. 13, 64 ; xii. 39 ; xiii. 32), and those where 
aT€<f>avo^ appears (iv. 57 ; x. 29 ; xi. 35 ; 2dii. 39 : 
cf. 2 Mace. xiv. 4). 

In respect of the New Testament, there can be, 
of course, no doubt that whenever St. Paul speaks 
of crowning, and of the crown, it is always the 
crown of the conqueror, and not of the king, which 
he has in his eye. The two passages, 1 Cor. ix. 24 — 



NEW TESTAMENT^ 115 

26 ; 2 Tim. ii. 5, place this beyond question ; while 
the epithet afxapdvrtvo^ applied to the aTi<f>avo^ T179 
B6^s (1 Pet. V. 4), leaves no doubt about St. Peter's 
allusion. If this is not so directly to the Greek 
games, yet still the contrast which he tacitly draws, 
is one between the wreaths of heaven which never 
fade, and the garlands of earth which lose their 
brightness and freshness so soon. At Jam. i. 12 ; 
Eev. ii. 10 ; iii. 11 ; iv. 4, it is more probable that a 
reference is not intended to these Greek games ; the 
alienation from which as idolatrous and profane was 
so deep on the part of the Jews (Josephus, Antt. 
XV. 8. 1 — 4), and no doubt also of the Jewish mem- 
bers of the Church, that an image drawn from the 
rewards of these games would have been to them 
rather repulsive than attractive. Yet there also the 
crTe<f>avo<;^ or the o*t€<^i/09 t^9 &»^9, is the emblem, 
not of royalty, but of highest joy and gladness, of 
glory and immortality. 

We may feel the more confident that in these 
last passages from the Apocalypse St. John did not 
intend kingly crowns^ from the circumstance that on 
three occasions, where beyond a doubt he does mean 
such, hia&qiw, is the word which he employs (Rev. 
xii. 3 ; xiii. 1 [cf. xvii. 9, 10, al en-ra K€<l>a\al . . . 
fiaaiS^'k eirrd eUnv] ; xix. 12). In tJbis last verse it 
is fitly said of Him who is Eang of kings and Lord 
of lords, that "on His head were Tnany crowna^^' 



116 •TKONmS OP THE 

{Bui8i]/iara 'jroXXd) ; an expression which, with all 
its grandeur, we find it hard to realize, so long as 
we picture to our mind's eye such crowns as at the 
present monarchs wear, but intelligible at once 
when we contemplate them as diadems, that is, nar- 
row fillets bound about the brow, such as Sta^fiara 
will imply. These " many diadems " will then be 
the tokens of the many royalties — of earth, of hea- 
ven, and of hell (Phil. ii. 10) — which are his ; roy- 
alties once usurped or assailed by the Great Eed 
Dragon, the usurper of Christ's dignity and honour, 
described therefore with his seven diadems as well 
(xiii. 1), but now openly and for ever assumed by 
Him to whom they rightfully belong ; just as, to 
compare earthly things with heavenly, we are told 
that when Ptolemy, king of Egypt, entered Antioch 
in triumph, he set two crowns {BiaSijpLaTa) on his 
head, the crown of Asia, and the crown of Egypt 
(1 Mace. xi. 13). 

The only place where ariifidvo^ might seem to 
be used of a kingly crown is Matt, xxvii. 29, with 
its parallels in the other Gospels, where the weaving 
of the crown of thorns {trre^avo^ axdvOivosi), and 
placing it on the Saviour's head, is evidently a 
part of that blasphemous caricature of royalty 
which the Boman soldiers enact. But woven of 
such materials as it was, probably of the Juncus 
ma/rvavs. or of the lycvwm spinostmiy it is evident 



NEW TESTAMENT. 117 

thftt SidSrjfjui could not be applied to it; and the 
word, therefore, which was fittest in respect of the 
material whereof it was composed, takes place of 
that which would have been the fittest in respect 
of the purpose for which it was intended. 



§ xxiv. — wXeove^ia, <l>iKaf)yvpia, 

Between these two words the same distinction 
exists as between our ' covetousness ' and ' avarice,' 
or as between the German ' Habsucht ' and * Geiz.' 
n\€ov€^ia is the more active sin, i^iCKapyvpia the 
more passive : the first seeks rather to grasp what 
it has not, and in this way to have more; the second, 
to retain, and, by accumulating, to multiply that 
which it already has. The first, in its methods of 
acquiring, will be often bold and aggressive ; even 
as it may, and often will be as free in scattering and 
squandering, as it was eager and unscrupulous in 
getting ; * rapti largitor,' as is well imagined in the 
Sir Giles Overreach of Massinger. Consistently 
with this we find irXeoviicTri^ joined with apirtt^ (1 
Cor. V. 10) ; irXeove^ia with /Sapvrrji; (Plutarch, Arist. 
8) ; and in the plural, with xXxmai (Mark vii. 22) ; 
with oBiKuu (Strabo, vii. 4. 6) ; with ^tKoveixlcu 
(Plato, Zegg. iii. 677 I) ; and the sin defined by 



118 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Theodoret : fj rov ir'Xjevovo^ lipeai^j teal tf r&v ov irpoa* 
fjKovrtav apTra^Tj, But, while it is thus with ifKeo* 
v€^la^ <l)cKapyvpla on the other hand will be often 
cautions and timid, and will not necessarily have 
cast off the outward appearances of righteousness. 
Thus, the Pharisees were (f>i\dpyvpoi, (Luke xvi. 14) ; 
this was not irreconcilable with the maintenance 
of the outward shows of holiness, which the ttXco- 
ve^ia would evidently have been. 

Cowley, in the delightful prose which he has 
mixed up with his verse, draws this distinction 
strongly and well {Essay 7, Of Avarice), though 
Chaucer had done the same before him in his Pm^ 
sones Tale: "There are," says Cowley, "two sorts 
of avarice ; the one is but of a bastard kind, and 
that is the rapacious appetite for gain ; not for its own 
sake, but for the pleasure of refunding it immedi- 
ately through all the channels of pride and luxury ; 
the other is the true kind, and properly so called, 
which is a restless and unsatiable desire of riches, 
not for any farther end or use, but only to hoard and 
preserve, and perpetually increase them. The cov- 
etous man of the first kind is like a greedy ostrich, 
which devours any metal, but it is with an intent 
to feed upon it, and, in effect, it makes a shift to 
digest and excern it. The second is like the foolish 
chough, which loves to steal money only to hide it.'* 

There* is another and more important point of 



NEW TESTAMENT. 119 

view, from wliich ifkcove^ia may be regarded a8 the 
wider, larger term, the genus, of which ^tXapyvpia 
is the species ; this last being the love of money, 
while irXeove^la is the drawing and snatching to 
himself, on the sinner's part, of the creature in every 
form and kind, as it lies out of and beyond himself; 
the 4ndigentia' of Cicero: (Indigentia est libido 
inexplebilis : TiiSG. iv. 9. 21).^ For this distinction 
between the words compare Augustine, Enarr, in 
Ps. cxviii. 35, 36 ; and Bengel's profound explana- 
tion of the fact, that, in the enumeration of sins, St. 
Paul so often unites irXeove^ia with sins of the flesh ; 
as at 1 Cor. v. 11 ; Eph. v. 3, 5 ; Col. iii. 6 : Solet 
autem jungere cum impuritate ifkeove^lav, nam 
homo extra Deum quserit pabulum in creaturS ma- 
terial, vel per voluptatem, vel per avaritiam; bo- 
num alienum ad se redigit. But, expressing much, 
Bengel has not expressed all. The connexion be- 
tween these two provinces of sin is deeper, is more 
intimate still ; and this is witnessed in the fact, that 
not merely is 7rXeoj/ef/a, as covetousness, joined to 
sins of impurity, but the word is sometimes in 
Scripture, continually by the Greek Fathers (see 
Suicer, The^. s. v.), employed to designate these sins 
themselves ; even as the root out of which they 
alike grow, namely, the fierce and ever fiercer long- 
ing of the creature which has turned from God, to 
fill itself with the inferior objects of sense, is one 



120 SYNONTKS OF THE 

and the same. Begarded thus, irXjeove^la has a 
much wider and deeper sense than <I>/Xapyvp{a. 
Take the sublime commentaiy on the word which 
Plato {Gorg. 493) supplies, where he likens the de- 
sire of man to the sieve or pierced yessel of the 
Danaids, which they were ever filling, but might 
never fill ; * and it is not too much to say, that the 
whole longing of the creature, as it has itself aban- 
doned God, and by a just retribution is abandoned 
by Him, to stay its hunger with the swines' husks, 
instead of the children's bread which it has left, is 
contained in this word. 



§ XXV. — fioa/coDy 7roifiaiv<o. 

While both these words are often employed in 
a figurative and spiritual sense in the Old Testa- 
ment, as at 1 Chron. xii. 16 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 3 ; Ps. 
Ixxvii. 72 ; Jer. xxiii. 2 ; and trotfiaUfetv oft;en in the 
New ; flie only occasions in the latter, where iSocKeiv 

' It is evident that the same comparison had occurred to Shak- 
•peare: 

•*The cloyed will. 
That satiate yet tmsatisfied desire, 
That tab both fill'd and nmmng." 

Chfmbeline, Act L Se. 7. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 121 

is SO used, are John xxi. 15, 17. There our Lord, 
giving to St. Peter his thrice repeated commission 
to feed his " lambs " (ver. 16), his "sheep " (ver. 16), 
and again his ^* sheep" (ver. 17), uses, on the first 
occasion, j36<rK€, on the second, irotfjuuvey and returns 
again to fiorrfce on the third. This return, on the 
third and last repetition of the charge, to Ae word 
employed on the first, has been a strong argument 
with some for the indifference of the words. They 
have urged, and with a certain show of reason, that 
Christ could not have had jprogressive aapects of the 
pastoral work in His intention, nor have purposed 
to indicate them here, else He would not have come 
back in the end to )8o<ric€, the same word with which 
He began. Yet I cannot believe the variation of 
the words to have been without a motive, any more 
than the changes, in the same verses, from ayairw 
to <f)CKelv^ from apvla to wp6l3ara. It is true that 
our Version, rendering jSotrxe and iroi^imwe alike by 
" Feed," has not attempted to reproduce the varia- 
tion, any mor^ than tlje Vulgate, which, on each 
occasion, has ^Pasce;' nor do I perceive any re- 
sources of language by which either the Latin 
Version or our own could have helped themselves 
here. It might be more possible in German, by 
aid of * weiden ' (— /86<r/c6*i^), and * hiiten ' (— iroi- 
fialv€iv)t; De Wette, hwever, has * weidenr' tib»Mg^- 
out* : ' .. , "^ X 



122 8TN0NYMS OF THE 

The distinction, although thus not capable of 
being easily reproduced in all languages, is very fer 
from fanciful, is indeed a mo6t real one. ^Sa-Koyy 
the same word as the Latin ' pasco,' is simply ' to 
feed : ' but Trot/iaiVoi involves much more ; the whole 
office of the shepherd, the entire leading, guiding, 
guarding, folding of the flock, as well as the finding 
of nourishment for it ; thus Lampe : Hoc symbolujn 
totum regimen ecclesiasticum comprehendit ; and 
Bengel : jSoa-fcecv est pars rov iroif/.abfew. Out of a 
sense continually felt, of a shadowing forth in the 
shepherd's work of the highest ministries of men 
for the weal of their fellows, and of the peculiar fit 
ness which this image has to set forth the same, iv 
has been often transferred to their office, who are, 
or should be, the faithful guides and guardians of 
the people committed to their charge. Kings, ii> 
Homer, are Troifiive^ Xa&v : cf. 2 Sam. v. 2 ; vii. 7. 
Nay more, in Scripture God Himself is a Shepherd 
(Isa. xl. 11) ; and David can use no words which 
shall so well express his sense of the Divine protec- 
tiom as these : Kvpuy; irocfiaivet jjs (Ps. xxiiL 1) ; 
Btor does the Lord take anywhere a higher title than 
o iroifi^ 6 KoKo^ (John x. 11 ; of. 1 Pet. v. 4, 6 op- 
;^t7roe/A^y : Heb. xiii. 20, 6 /ic^a? 'jrocfifjv r&v 'irpofior 
Twv; nor give a higher than that implied in this 
word to his ministers. Compare the sublime pas- 
sage in Philo, De AgHcvl. 12, beginning: ovrw 



IfEW TESTAMENT. 123 

fjkkvTov TO iroifiaiveiv iarh ayoBbvj &<rre oif fior 
aCKevtn fiavop xal aotfyot^ avSpdai, xal -^i/j^at? t€- 
Xeia ic€fC{iOap/j,ivauSj iXKct /cal Oe^ t^ iravrjyefiovc 
StKUito^ avarljBerai, : and also the three sections pre- 
ceding. 

Still, it may be asked, if iroifmivecv be thus the 
higher word, and if iroifuuve was therefore superadd- 
ed upon fioa-KCj because it was so, and implied so 
many further ministries of care and tendance, why 
does it not appear in the last, which must be also 
the most solemn, commission given by the Lord to 
Peter? how are we to account, if this be true, for 
his returning to ^6<tk€ again ? I cannot doubt that 
in Stanley's Sermons and Essays on the Apostolical 
Age^ p. 138, the right answer is given. The lesson, 
in fact, which we learn from this His coming back 
to the P6<TKe with which He had begun, is a most 
important one, and one which the Church, and all 
that bear rule in the Church, have need diligently 
to lay to heart ; this namely, that whatever else of 
discipline and rule may be superadded hereto, still, 
the feeding of the flock, the finding for them of 
spiritaal nourishment, is the first and last ; nothing 
else will supply the room of this, nor may be allow- 
ed to put this out of its foremost and most important 
place. How often, in a false ecclesiastical system, 
the preaching of the word loses its pre-eminence ; 
the ^cKeiv falls into the background, is swallowed 



122 8TN0NYMS OF THE 

The distinction, although thus not capable of 
being easily reproduced in all languages, is very far 
from fanciful, is indeed a moet real one. ^oo-atco, 
the same word as the Latin ' pasco,' is simply ' to 
feed : ' but Trot/iaiVoi involves much more ; the whole 
office of the shepherd, the entire leading, guiding, 
guarding, folding of the flock, as well as the finding 
of nourishment for it ; thus Lampe : Hoc symboluin 
totum regimen ecclesiasticum comprehendit ; and 
Bengel : /Socxetv est pars 7ov irotfi.aivew. Out of a 
sense continually felt, of a shadowing forth in the 
shepherd's work of the highest ministries of men 
for the weal of their fellows, and of the peculiar fit 
ness which this image has to set forth the same, iv 
has been often transferred to their office, who are, 
or should be, the faithful guides and guardians of 
the people committed to their charge. Kings, ii> 
Homer, are iroifikve^ \a&p : cf. 2 Sam. v. 2 ; vii 7. 
Nay more, in Scripture God Himself is a Shepherd 
(Isa. xl. 11) ; and David can use no words which 
shall so well express his sense of the Divine protec- 
tion as these : Kvpuy; iroLfiaivet pe (Ps. xxiiL 1) ; 
ttor does the Lotd take anywhere a higher title than 
o iro^fioiv & KoXo^ (John x. 11 ; of. 1 Pet v. 4, 6 o/)- 
Xt7roe/*^y : Heb. xiii. 20, 6 /Acya? iroc/j^v r&v irpo^or 
Tmv\ nor give a higher than that implied in this 
word to his ministers. Compare the sublime pas* 
sage in Philo, De Agricul. 12, beginning: o5tw 



NEW TESTAMENT. 123 

fUvTOi TO iroi^alvuv i<rr\v a*^aGov^ &trr€ oi ^or 
<riKev(n /movop /cal <To<f>ot<; avSpdai, xal '^jrv^dl^ ri- 
Xeta KCKoOapfiipaiSj aX\A Kal Oe^ r^ iravrfjefiovt 
hiKixifo^ avarWerai, : and also the three sections pre- 
ceding. 

Still, it may be asked, if iroifmlveiv be thus the 
higher word, and if iroifuuve was therefore superadd- 
ed upon fioa-xe, because it was so, and implied so 
many further ministries of care and tendance, why 
does it not appear in the last, which must be also 
the most solemn, commission given by the Lord to 
Peter? how are we to account, if this be true, for 
his returning to ySoc/ee again ? I cannot doubt that 
in Stanley's Sermons and Essays on the Apostolical 
Age^ p. 138, the right answer is given. The lesson, 
in fact, which we learn from this His coming back 
to the ^oaKe with which He had begun, is a most 
important one, and one which the Church, and all 
that bear rule in the Church, have need diligently 
to lay to heart ; this namely, that whatever else of 
discipline and rule may be superadded tiiereto, still, 
the feeding of the flock, the finding for them of 
spiritual nourishment, is the first and last ; nothing 
else will supply the room of this, nor may be allow- 
ed to put this out of its foremost and most important 
place. How often, in a false ecclesiastical system, 
the preaching of the word loses its pre-eminence ; 
the fioQKuv falls into the background, is swallowed 



124 SYNONYMS OF THE 

up in tlie iroifialvew, whidi presentlj becomes no 
true TToifuiipei^Vy because it is not a fiSa-tceiv as well, 
but such a ' shepherding ' rather as God's Word, by 
the prophet Ezekiel, has denounced (xxxiv. 2, 3, S, 
10 ; cf. Zech. xiii. 16 — 17 ; Matt, xxiii.). 



§ xxvi. — 55X09, ff)66vo^. 

These words are often joined together ; they are 
so by St. Paul, Gal. v. 20, 21 ; by Clemens Boma- 
nus, 1 Ep. ad Cor. 3, 4, 5 ; and by classical writers 
as well; as, for instance, by Plato, PKU. 47^/ Legg. 
679 c; Menex. 242 a. Still, there are diflferences 
between them ; and this first, that (;QXo9 is a fUaov^ 
being used sometimes in a good (as John ii. 17 ; 
Bom. X. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 2), sometimes, and in Scripture 
oftener, in an evil sense (as Acts v. 17 ; Eom. xiii. 
13 ; Gal. v. 20 ; Jam. iii. 14) ; while ^Bovo^ is not 
capable of a good, but is used always and only in 
an evil signification. When §7X09 is taken in good 
part, it signifies the honourable emulation, with the 
consequent imitation, of that which presents itself 
to the mind as excellent; ^Xov r&v apianov, Lucian, 
Adv. Indoct. 17 ; 57Xo9##cal fufjurjai^y Herodian, ii. 4 ; 
fiyXorr^? kcu fjki^fiijn^^j vi. 8. It is the Latin * semultt- 
tio,' in which nothing of envy is of necessity in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 1VTI» 

eluded, however it is possible that such may find 
place; the German ^Nacheiferung,' as distinguished 
from ' Eifersucht.' The verb ' semulor,' as i^ well 
known, finely expresses the distinction of worthy 
and unworthy emulation, governing an accusative 
in cases where the first, a dative where the second, 
is intended. 

By Aristotle {Rhet ii. 11) §7X09 is employed ex- 
clusively in this nobler sense, to signify the active 
emulation which grieves, not that another has the 
good, but that itself has it not; and which, not 
stopping here, seeks to make the wanting its own, 
and in this respect is contrasted by him with envy : 
eari, 55X^9 \v7rq rtv cttI ^ivofMeinj irapovala ajad&v 
ivrifiiovj .... ovx ^^ aXXo), aXX Sti ovj^l kcu avrip 
ioTt' Sto xal iineiKh i<mv o $7X09, fcal em€iK&v 
TO ii ^oveivy (f>av\oVy fcal (pavXcov. Cf. Jerome, 
£Joop. in Gal. v. 20 : §17X09 et in bonam partem accipi 
potest, quum quis nititur ea quse bona sunt semulari. 
Invidia vero alienii felicitate torquetur ; and again, 
In Gal. iv. 17 : -^mulantur bene, qui cum videant 
in aliquibus esse gratias, dona, virtutes, ipsi tales 
esse desiderant. CEcumenius: lart §7X09 Kivqai^ 

rov trpo^ h 1} awovS'^ ioTi. 

But it is only too easy for this zeal and honour- 
ab.e rivalry to degenerate into a meaner passion, a 
lact which is strikingly attested in the Latin word 



126 SYNONYMS OF THE 

'simultas,' connected, as Doderlein {Lot. Synon. 
vol. iii. p. 72) shows, not with ^ simulare,' bnt with 
^ simul ; ' those who together aim at the same object 
being in danger not merely of being competitors, 
but enemies; just as a/^tXXa, which however has 
kept its more honourable use (Plutarch, Armn. cmv 
Corp. (ipp. pej. 3), is connected with &fia. Hiese 
degeneracies which wait so near upon emulation, 
may assume two shapes ; either that of a desire to 
make war upon the good which it beholds in 
another, and thus to trouble that good, and make it 
less ; therefore we find f^Xov and ep^9 continually 
joined together (Rom. xiii. 13 ; 2 Cor. xii. 20 ; Gal. 
V. 20 ; Clem. Eom. 1 J^. 3, 6) ; or, where there is 
not vigour and energy enough to attempt the making 
of it less, there may be at least the wishing of it 
less. And here is the point of contact which §5X09 
has with <I>66po^ : thus Plato, Menex. 242 a : irpSnov 
fiev {?}Xo9, airo jVjXou he ^66vo^ : the latter being 
essentially passive, as the former is active and ener- 
gic. We do not find <f>d6vo<; in the comprehensive 
catalogue of sins at Mark vii. 21, 22 ; its place be- 
ing there supplied by a circumlocution, 6<l>0a\fji6<; 
irov7)p6<;, but one putting itself in connexion with 
the Latin ' invidia,' which is derived, as Cicero ob- 
serves, ^a nimis int/aendo fortunam alterius;' cf. 
Matt. XX. 15 ; and 1 Sam. xviii. 9 : " Saul eyed^^ 
i, e. envied " David." OOovos is the meaner sin, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 127 

being merely displeasnre at another's goods * (XtWny 
eTr' aX\joTpioi,<; ayadoU^ as the Stoics defined it, 
Diogenes Laertius, vii. 68. Ill), with the desire 
\that these may be less ; and this, quite apart from 
any hope that thereby its own will be more (Aris- 
totle, lihet. ii. 10). He that feels it, does not feel 
with it any impulse or longing to raise himself to 
the level of him whom he envies, but only to de- 
press the other to his own.* When the victories of 
Miltiades would not suffer tiie youthful Themistoclee 
to sleep (Plutarch, Them. 3), here was ^7X0^, that 
is, in its nobler form, for it was such as prompted 
him to worthy actions, and would not let him rest 
till he had set a Salamis of his own against the Ma- 
rathon of his great predecessor. But it was ^omi 
which made that Athenian citizen to be weary of 
hearing Aristides evermore styled " The Just " (Plu- 
tarch, Arist. 7) ; and this his ff>06vo^ contained no 
impulses moving him to strive for himself after the 
justice which he envied in another. See on this 

* Augustine's definition of ^B6vos {Exp. in Gal. v. 21) is not 
quite sutisfactory: Invidia vero dolor animi est, cum indignus yi- 
detur aliquis assequi etiam quod non appetebas. This would 
rather be y4fi«riv and v^iiwav in the ethical terminology of Aris- 
totle (Eihic. Mc. ii. 7. 16; Rhet 2. 9). 

* On the likenesses and differences between tucos and i^6voi^ 
see Plutarch's graceful little essay, full of subtle analysis of the 
human hearty De Iimdid et Odia, 



128 SYNONTMB OF THE 

subject further the beantiM remarks of Plutarch, 
Be Prof. ViH. 14. 



§ xxvii. — fow;, fiux;. 

Thb Latiu language and the English are alike 
poorer than the Greek, in having but one word, the 
Latin ^ vita/ the English ^ life,' to express these two 
Greek. There would, indeed, be no comparative 
poverty here, if fow; and fiuy: were merely dupli- 
cates ; but, covering as they do very diflFerent spaces 
of meaning, it is certain that we, having but one 
word for them both, must use this one in very di- 
verse senses ; it is possible that by this equivocation 
we may, without being aware of it, conceal very 
real and important differences from ourselves ; for, 
indeed, there is nothing so potent to do this as the 
equivocal use of a word. 

The true antithesis of Jaw; is ddvaro^ (Eom. vili. 
38 ; 2 Cor. v. 4 ; cf. Jer. viii. 3 ; Sirac. xxx. 17 ; 
Plato, Legg. xii. 944 c\ as of the verb Ji^v, airoOvri* 
aiceiv (Matt. xx. 38 ; 1 Tim. v. 6 ; Eev. i. 18 ; cf. B. 
xxiii. 70; Herodotus, i. 31; Plato, PJujedOy 71 d: 
oifK hfoinlov (fny: t^ ^v to redvdveu elvaC) ; fewiy, in 
fact, being very nearly connected with &», &niii^ to 
breathe the breath of life, which is tlie necessary 



NEW TESTAMENT. 129 

condition of living, and, as such, is involved in like 
manner in irvev/jLa and '^irxrj. 

Bnt, while fow; is thus life intensive Q vita qu& 
vivimus '), )8to? is life extensvve (^ vita qnam vivi- 
mus '), the period or duration of life ; and then, 
in a secondary sense, the means by which that life 
is sustained ; and thirdly, the manrier in which that 
life is spent. Examples of the use of /3io^ in all 
these senses the New Testament supplies. Thus it 
ia used as — 

' a, the period or duration of life ; 1 Pet. iv. 3, 
Xpovo<: Tov fiiov: cf. Job. x. 20, /3io^ tov 'xpivovi Plu- 
tarch, De lAb. Ed. 17 : cntyfii} ')(p6vov tto? o filo^ icrrc. 

fij the means of life, or ^ living,' K V. ; Mark 
xii. 44 ; Luke viii. 43 ; xv. 12 ; 1 John iii. 17, tov 
8iov TOV Koa-fiov : cf. Plato, Gorg. 486 d; Legg. 936 
c ; Aristotle, Hist. Anim. ix. 23. 2 ; and often, but 
not always, these means of life, with an under sense 
of largeness and abundance. 

y, the manner of life ; 1 Tim. ii. 2 ; so Plato, 
Pel. 344 e : filov htaywyri : and Plutarch very nobly 
{De Is. et Os. 1) : tov Se jLvm<TK€iv tA ^vra, koi (fypo- 
vetv cufxupeO&no^, ov filov aXKcL ^ovov [otfiai] eluai 
T^v aOavaalav : and De Lih. Ed. 7 : Terar/ixho<; fiio<; : 
Josephus, Antt. v. 10. 1 ; with which compare Au- 
gustine {De Trin. xii. 11) : Cujus vitse sit quisque ; 
id est, qvomodo agat hcec temporalia^ quam vitam 
Grseci non ^cdijv sed fiiov vocant. 
6* 



130 SYNONYMS OF THE 

From this last use of ^Sto?, as the maimer of life, 
there is often an ethical sense inhering in it, which, 
in classical Greek at least, fo)?? does not possess. 
Thus Aristotle, according to Ammonius, could draw 
the following distinction between the words ; pUy; 
iarl XoyiK^ ^(otj : Ammonius himself affirming /Sib? 
to be never, except incorrectly, applied to the eodst^ 
ence of plants or animals, but only to the Ivoes of 
men.' I know not how he can reconcile this state- 
ment with such passages as these from Aristotle, 
£!i8t. Anim. i. 1. 16 ; ix. 8. 1 ; unless, indeed, lie 
would include him in his censure. Still, the dis- 
tinction which he is here somewhat too absolutely 
asserting, must be acknowledged as a real one ; it 
displays itself with great clearness in our words 
* zoology ' and * biography.' We speak, on the one 
hand, of *soology,' for animals have the vital prin- 
ciple; they live, as well as men; and they arc 
capable of being classed and described in relation 
to the different workings of this natural life of 
theirs ; but, on the other hand, we speak of 'Uo- 
graphy ;' for men not merely live, but they lead 
live^, Uves in which there is that moral distinction 
between one and another which may make them 
well worthy to be recorded. Out of this it wiU fol- 

> See on thU pointy and generaUy on iheoe two Bynonymfl. V5. 
m«l, Syntm. WdrUfrlmeh, p. 168 sq. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 131 

low, that, while ddvaro<s and few; constitute, as was 
observed above, the true antithesis, yet they do so 
only so long as both are phydcaUy contemplated. 
So soon as a moral idea is introduced, the antithesis 
is not between ddvaro^ and (foii;, but Oaparo^ and 
fiiog : thus Xenophon {Reap. Laced. 9. 1) : tov xa- 
"Kj^v ddvarov avrl rov aUrxpov fflov. The two great 
chapters with which the Oorgias of Plato concludes 
(82, 88), are alone suflScient to bring plainly before 
the consciousness the full distinction between the 
words themselves, as also between those derived 
from them. 

But this being the case, /Sw, and not fow;, being 
thus shown to be the ethical word in classical anti- 
quity, a thoughtful reader of Scripture might very 
well inquire with something of perplexity, how it 
is to be explained that there all is reversed — fy^ 
being certainly in it the nobler word, belonging to 
the innermost circle of those terms whereby are 
expressed the highest gifts of God to his creatures ; 
so that, while ^io^ has there no such noble use, but 
rather the contrary — for we find it in such associa- 
tions as these, f}hoval rov fiiov (Luke viii. 14), w/Doy- 
fiareia^ rov filov (2 Tim. ii. 4), aka^oveia rov filov 
(1 John ii. 16) — 5»»7, on the other hand, is continu- 
ally used in the very noblest connexion ; crriif>avo^ 
T% f«^9 (Rev. ii. 10), fii^09 t^9 imy: (iii. 5), f®^ 
Kal €v<Tifi€ia (2 Pet. 1. 8), ?«^ zeal a<f>0ap<ria (2 Tim. 



132 SYNONYMS OF THE 

i. 10), ^wn Tov Oeov (Eph. iv. 18), fo)^ amvto^ (Matt. 
xix. 16) ; * or it may be simply fow; (Matt. vii. 14:, 
and often), to express the highest blessedness of the 
creature. 

A little reflection will supply the answer. Re- 
vealed religion, and it alone, puts death and sin in 
closest connexion, declares them the necessary cor- 
relatives one of the other (Gen. i. — iii. ; Eom. v. 12), 
and, as an involved* consequence, in like manner, 
life and holiness. It alone proclaims that, wherever 
there is death, it is there because sin was there first; 
wherever there is no death, that is, life, it is there 
because sin has never been there, or, having been 
once, is now cast out and expelled. In revealed 
religion, which thus makes death to have come into 
the world through sin, and only through sin, life is 
the correlative of holiness. Whatever truly lives, 
does so because sin has never found place in it, or, 
having found, has been expelled from it. So soon 
as ever this is felt and imderstood, ^0)17 at once as- 
sumes the profoundest moral significance ; it be- 
comes the fittest expression for the very highest 
blessedness. Of that whereof you predicate abso- 
lute ^091]^ you predicate of the same absolute holi- 
ness. Christ aflSrming of Himself, iydl> eifxi, 17 fwij, 

' ZdAi dittos oooars once in the Septuagiut (Dan. xii 2 ; cf. (uii 
i/ivao9, 2 Mace vii. 86), and in Plutarch, De Imd, et 0«. 1. 



NEW TBBTAMKNT. 133 

implicitly affirmed of Himself that He was absolute 
holiness ; and in the creature, in like manner, that 
only IweSy or triumphs over death, death at once 
physical and spiritual, which has first triumphed 
over sin. No wonder, then, that Scripture should 
know of no higher word than fow; to set forth either 
the blessedness of God, or the blessedness of the 
creature in communion with God. 

From what has been said it will at once be per- 
ceived how erroneous is that exposition of Eph. iv. 
18, which understands aTri^XXorpuo/Li^^ 1% §<o^ 
ToS Oeovy as " alienated from a divine life," or, from 
a life lived according to the will and commandments 
of God (remoti a vitfi illS qu» secundum Deum est: 
Grotius), JawJ having never, certainly never with 
St. Paul, this signification. The fact of such aliena- 
tion was only too true ; but it is not what the Apos- 
tle is affirming. Eather he is there describing the 
miserable condition of the heathen, as of men es- 
tranged from God, the one fountain of life {ifapit 
Sol irqyri f«^, Ps. xxxv. 10) ; as not having life, 
because separated from Him who alone absolutely 
lives (John v. 26), and in connexioli with whom 
alone any creature has life. Gal. v. 22 is another 
passage, which we shall never rightly understand, 
which will always seem to contain a tautology, 
until we give to fcoiy (and to the verb 571^ as well), 
the force which has been claimed for it here. 



134 SYNONYMS OF THE 



§ xxviii. — Kvpio^^ BeawoTT)^, 

The distinction which the later Greek gram- 
marians sought to trace between these words was 
this; a man would be he<nr&rq^^ as respects his 
slaves (Plato, Legg, 756 e\ and therefore olKoi&rrro^ 
T);9, but Kvpto<; in respect of his wife and children, 
who, in speaking either to him or of him, would 
use this title of honour ; " as Sara obeyed Abraham, 
calling him lord^^ {icvpiov ainov fcaXoOcray 1 Pet. 
iii. 6 ; cf. 1 Sam. i. 8 ; and Plutarch, De Vwt, Mvl. 
s, vv. MucKa Koi Merft(rrm). There is a certain truth 
in this distinction. Undoubtedly there does lie in 
Kvpto^ the sense of an authority owning limitations, 
— moral limitations it may be — and the word im- 
plies that the user will not exclude, in its use, their 
good over whom it is exercised ; while in SecnroriT? 
is implied a more unrestricted power and absolute 
domination, confessing no such limitations or re- 
straints. He who addresses another as bicnrora^ puts 
a fer greater emphasis of submission into his speech 
than if he had addressed him as Kvpie, It was out 
of a feeling of this that the free Greeks refused this 
title of BeairoTTj^ to any but the gods (Euripides, 
Svppol. 88 : ava^^ 6eov<s yctp heairora^ /caXetp XP^^^) 5 
and the sense of this distinction of theirs we have 



NEW TESTAMENT. 135 

retained in our use of ^ despot/ * despotic,' * despot- 
ism,' as set over against our use of ' lord,' ' lordship,' 
and the like ; the ' despot ' is one who exercises not 
only dominion, but domination. 

Still, there were influences at work, whose ten- 
dency was to break down any such distinction as 
this. Slavery, however legalized, is so abhorrent to 
naen's inborn sense of right, that they seek to miti- 
gate, in word at least, if not in fact, the atrocity of 
it ; and thus, as no southern Planter at the present 
day willingly speaks of his " slaves," but prefers 
some other term, so in antiquity, as far as any gen- 
lier or more humane view of slavery obtained, and 
it was not merely contemplated in the aspect of one 
man's unlimited power over another, the antithesis 
of BeoTTOTfj^ and Sot)\o9 would continually give place 
to that of Kvpio9 and &)t)Xo9. The harsher antago- 
nism would still survive, but the milder would pre- 
vail side by side with it. So practically we find it ; 
one language is used as ireely as the other ; and 
often in the same sentence both terms are employed 
(Philo, Qicod Onrn. Prob, Lib. 6). We need not 
look further than to the writings of St. Paul, to see 
how little, in popular speech, the distinction of the 
Greek synonymists was observed. Masters are now 
KvpLOL (Eph. vi. 9 ; Col. iv. 1), and now SetnroTai 
(1 Tim. vi. 1, 2 ; Tit ii. 9 ; cf. 1 Pet. ii. 18), witli 
him. 



136 SYNONYMS OF THE 

But, whUe all experience shows how little sinfal 
man can be trusted with absolute unrestricted power 
over his fellow, how certain he is to abuse it — a 
moral fact attested in our use of ^ despot' as equiv- 
alent with ' tyrant,' as well as in the history of the 
word * tyrant' itself — it can only be a blessedness 
for mMi to think of God as the absolute Lord, Euler, 
and Disposer of his life ; since with Him power is 
never disconnected from wisdom and from love: 
and, as we saw that the Greeks, not without a cer- 
tain sense of this, were well pleased to style the 
gods Sccnrorae, however they might refrise this title 
to any other ; so, within the limits of Eevelation, 
we find SeairoTTf^j no less than icvpio^^ applied to the 
true God. In the Old Testament, * Adonai ' is occa- 
sionally rendered by the two words joined together; 
as at Gen. XV. 2, 8; Jer. i.6; iv. 10. No doubt 
SeoTTOTiy? realized to their minds who used it, even 
more than icvpto^^ the sense of God's absolute dis- 
posal of His creatures, His autocratic power ; and 
that when He worked, none could let Him. That 
it did so present itself to Greek ears is plain from 
a passage in Philo {Quis Her. JDw. ITcer. 6), where 
he finds an evidence of Abraham's evkdfieui, of his 
tempering, on one great occasion, boldness with 
reverence and godly fear, in the fact that in his ap- 
proaches to God he leaves the more usual icvpie^ and 
instead of it adepts the SecrTrora, in which there was 



NKW TBSTAMENT. 137 

implied a more entire prostration of self, an ampler 
recognition of the omnipotence of God. The pas- 
sages in the New Testament where God is styled 
SeainiTTjs are these which follow : Lnke ii. 29 ; Acts 
iv. 24 ; Eev. vi. 10 ; 2 Pet. ii. 1 ; Jnde 6. In the 
two last it is to Christ, but to C3irist as God, that 
the title is ascribed. Erasmus, indeed, with that 
latent Arianism, of which, perhaps, he was scarcely 
eonscions to himself, denies that in the words of 
Jnde S€€nr6T7f¥ is to be referred to Christ ; giving 
only Mjptov to Him, and B€<rn-6n)v to the Father. 
The &ct that in the Greek text, as he read it, Oeov 
followed and was joined to ieairorriVy no doubt really 
lay at the root of his reluctance to ascribe the title 
of ieoTTOTqfi to Christ. It was with him not a philo- 
logical, but a theological difficulty, however he 
may have sought to persuade himself otherwise. 



§xxix. — dXa$c6i/, VTreprfi^vo^^ v/Spiar'q^. 

These words, which occur all three of them to- 
gether at Eom. i. 80, and the first two at 2 Tim. iii. 
2, oflfer an interesting subject for synonymous dis- 
crimination. We shall find them, I think, not to 
speak of other diflferences, constituting a regular 
sequence in this respect, that the aXa^mf is boastful 



138 SYKOKTMS OF THE 

in lAord^^ the inrepij<f>ap<s proud in thoughts^ the 
vfipLorrrfi insolent and injurious in acts. 

And first, as respects oKaidav, This word occurs 
in the New Testament only at the two places al* 
ready referred to ; aka^ovela also twice, Jam. iv. 16 ; 
1 John ii. 16. Derived from i^q^ 'a wandering 
about,' it was applied first to vagabond mounte- 
banks, conjurers, and exorcists (Acts xix. 13 ; 1 Tim. 
V. 13), who were full of empty and boastful profes- 
sions of feats which tiey could accomplish ; being 
from tliem transferred to any braggart or boaster, 
vaunting himself to be in possession of skill, or 
knowledge, or courage, or virtue, or riches, or what* 
ever else it might be, which had no existence in 
fact. Thus Plato defines aXafyvela to be i^ wpocr- 
TroLrjTvicri aya6S)v fir) {nrap^vToov: and Xenophon 
{Cyrcfp. ii. 2. 12) describes the aXa^wp thus : 6 fih 
yap aXa^oiv efiotye Soxei Svo/ia Keiadai hrl T0t9 nrpoa- 
iroiovjJikvoL^ Kal irXova-ccoTipoi^ elvai ^ €wrt, Kal 
avSp€toTipoc<;, Kal iroiricretv^ h fitf UavoL elaiy inruT' 
yyovfjiivoi*;' koX ravra, <f>av€poU yiyvo/iivoL^, oti, tov 
XalSelv Ti Ivexa xal Kephavat, iroiovaiv : and Aris- 
totle {Ethic. Nic. iv. 7. 2) : ZokA Sif 6 fiev aXafwi^ 
irpotnroiTjrcKo^ t&v ipSo^v elva^, teal pw) xnrap^vrmv^ 
Kal fi€i^6p<ov fj inrdpx^i. 

It is not an accident, but of the essence of the 
dXa^coi/, that in his boastings he overpasses the limits 
of the truth (Wisd. ii. 16,) as appears plainly from 



NEW TESTAMENT. 139 

that whole passage in Aristotle, who nowhere de- 
scribes him as merely making unseemly display of 
things which he actually possesses, but as vaunting 
of those which he does not possess ; cf. Rhet, ii. 6 : 
TO T^ ahXorpui avrov <f>d(TKeLv^ aka^ovela^: ar)/i€tov: 
and Xenophon, Memor. i. 7. Thus, too, Plato {Pol. 
660 c)' joins '^frevSeU teal aXa^ove^ Xoyoc ; and we have 
a lively description of the oKabav in the Cha/racters 
(23) of Theophrastus ; and still better, of the shiflB 
and evasions to which he has I'ecourse, in the work. 
Ad Herenn. iv. 50, 51. While, therefore, ' braggart ' 
or ' boaster ' fairly represents aXafcoi/, ' ostentation * 
does not well give back aXafoi/eta, seeing that a man 
can only be ostentatious in that which he really has 
tiO show ; we have, in fact, no word which renders 
it at all so adequately as the German * Prahlerei.^ 
Tims, Falstaff and ParoUes are both excellent, 
though infinitely diverse, examples of the oKatSiiiv : 
while, on the contrary, Marlowe's Tamburlaine, 
despite of all the big vaunting words which he ut- 
ters, is no such, inasmuch as there are fearful reali- 
ties of power with which these his /jL€yd\7)<; yXMa-arj^ 
Ko/iwoi are sustained and borne out. This dealing 
in braggadocia is a vice sometimes ascribed to 
whole nations ; thus, an €fi<f>vTo^ aXafyvela was 
charged on the -^tolians of old, and, in modern 
times, on the Gascons, who out of this have given 
us the word 'gasconade.' The Vulgate, which 



140 STNOHTMB OF THE 

translates oKa^ove^:, ^ elati,' and which the Bhemi^h 
follows, ^ hanghty,' has not seized the middle point 
of the word as snccessftdly as Eeza, who has ren- 
dered it 'gloriosi.' ' 

A distinction has been sometimes drawn be- 
tween the aXa^dv and the iripTrepo^ [^ a^dmi ov wep- 
vepevera^ 1 Cor. xiii. 4], that the first vaunts of 
things which he does not possess, the second, of 
things which, — however little this his boasting and 
bravery about them may become him, — he actually 
has. The distinction, however, is not one that can 
be maintained (Polybius, xxxii. 6. 6 ; xl. 6. 2) ; both 
are liars alike. 

But this habitual boasting of one's own, will 
hardly Ml to be accompanied with a contempt for 
that of others. K it did not find, it would rapidly 
generate, such a feeling; and thus oKa^oveia is 
nearly allied to inrepo^ia : we find them not seldcmi 
used as almost convertible terms ; thus see Philo, 
De Ca/rit. 22 — ^24. But from imepir^Ca to inrepff^xwia 
the step is very near ; and thus we need not wonder 

' We formerly used * glorious * in this sense. Thu% in North's 
Plutarch, p. 188 : " Some took this for a gUmom brag ; others 
thought he. [Alcibiades] was like enough to have done it" And 
Milton (llie RecLson of Church Govetnmenty i 5) : '* He [Anselm] 
little dreamt then that the weeding hook of Reformation would, 
after two ages, pluck up his gloriow poppy [prelacy] from insult- 
ing oreif the good corn [presbytery].** 



NEW TESTAMENT. 141 

to meet xnrepri^va^ joined witli oKa^iiv. This word 
occurs three times, besides the two occasions noted 
abeady ; at Luke i. 61 ; Jam. iv. 6 ; 1 Pet v. 6 ; 
inr€pff<f>avia once, Mark vii. 22. A picturesqne 
image serves for its basis, being, of course, derived 
from inripi and 4>aipofiai, one who shows himsdf 
above his fellows, exactly as the Latin * superbns ' is 
from ^ super;' .as our * stilts' is connected with 
*Stok,' and with * stout' in its earlier sense of 
* proud,' or * lifted up.' Deyling, Ohss, Sac vol. v. 
p. 219 : Qu8& vox proprie notat hominem capite sur 
per alios eminentem, ita ut quemadmodum Saul, 
pr» ceteris, sit conspicuus, 1 Sam. ix, 2. Figurate 
est is qui ubique eminere, et aliis prseferri cupit. 

A man can be actually oKa^v only when he is 
in company with his fellow men ; but the seat of 
the virefyqJMvla is the mind. He that is sick of this 
sin, compares himself secretly with others, and lifts 
himself cAove others, in honour preferring himself. 
His sin, as Theophrastus {Cha/mct. 34) describes it, 
is the jcara^pmnfo^k Tt9 'irXifv nvrov r&v aXKmv, His 
conduct to others is not of the essence of his sin, it 
is only the consequence. His ^ arrogance,' as we say, 
his claiming to himself of honour and observance, 
his indignation,, and, it may be, his cruelty and re- 
venge, if these are withheld, are only the result of 
this false estimate of himself. Li this way vwepi]' 
6avoi fcai fiapeU (Plutarch, Qu. Horn, 63) are joined 



142 SYNONYMS OF THE 

together. In the inrepij^vo^ we have tne perrersion 
of a much nobler character than in the aXa^oiv, the 
melancholic, as the aXo^coi/ is the sanguine, the 
vfipuTT/f; the choleric, temperament ; but because 
nobler, therefore one which, if it falls, fells more 
deeply, sins more fearfully. He is one, in the 
striking language of Scripture, " whose heart is lift- 
ed up," vyfnjkoKdpSio<: (Prov, xvi. 5) ; he is one of 
those tA v-^XA ^povovvre: (Horn. xii. 16), as opposed 
to the Tom-etvol if xapSuf ; and this lifting up of his 
heart may be not merely against man, but against 
Gk)d ; he may assail the very prerogatives of Deity 
itself (1 Mace i. 21, 24 ; Wisd. xiv. 6 : trrrepi^wn 
yiydvT€$). Therefore are we thrice told, in the very 
same words, that " God resisteth the proud " {vvepif- 
<f>dvov; avTvrdaaercu : Jam. iv. 6 ; 1 Pet. v. 5 ; Prov. 
iii. 34) ; sets Himself in battle array against them, 
as they against Him. 

We have now to speak of v/Spurr^^ which, by 
its derivation from vfipi^, (which is, again, from forcp, 
as we should say, ^ uppishness,') stands in a oertain 
etymological relation with xnrepri^uMvo^ (see Donald- 
son, ]!few CratylAia^ pp. 617-^519). The word occurs 
only twice ; Eom. i. 30, where we have translated 
it, ^deapiteftil;' and 1 Tim. i. 18, where we have 
rendered it, ^ injurious.' In the Septuagint often ; 
and at Job xl. ^, 7 ; Isa. ii. 12, in connexion with 
virepfi^vo^ : as the two, in like manner, are con- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 143 

nected by Aristotle {Hhet. ii. 16). Other words with 
which it is associated, are 07/9109 (Homer, Od. vi. 
120) ; aTdar0a\o9 {lb. xxiv. 282) ; oStKo^ (Plato, Zegff. 
i. 630 h) ; inrepoTrrfy; (Aristotle, Ethic. Nic. vi. 3. 
21). The vfipurn^ is contumelious ; his insolence 
and contempt of others break forth in acts of wan- 
tonness and outrage. Thus, when Hanun, king of 
Ammon, cut short the garments of king David's 
ambassadors, and shaved off half their beards, and 
so sent them back (2 Sam. x.), this was 5/8/)t9. St. 
Paul declares that, in the time when he persecuted 
the Church, he was v^pMTi]^ (1 Tim. i. 13 ; cf. Acts 
viii. 8), but that he was himself vfipurBei^ (1 Thess. 
ii. 2) at Phibppi (Acts xvi. 22, 23). Our blessed 
Lord, when He is prophesying the order of His 
Passion, declares that the Son of Man v/3pi<r0i]<r€Ta^ 
(Luke xviii. 32), as we have later the account of 
the 5/8/?^ which He actually imderwent at the 
hands of the Boman soldiery (Matt, xxvii. 27 — 30). 
The whole blasphemous masquerade of royalty, in 
which it was sought that He should sustain the 
chief part, was such. Tacitus, describing the deaths 
of the Christians in Nero's persecution, adds {An- 
nal. XV. 44) : Pereuntibus addita ludibria ; they 
died, he would say, fied' 6/3 peo)^: the same applies 
to York, when, in Shakspeare's Senry FZ, the pa- 
per crown is set upon his head, before Margaret 
and Clifford stab him. 



144 STNQNTMS OF THE 



Cruelty and lust are the two great spheres in 
which v/8pi9 will display itself; or rather not two ; 
— for they are one and the same sin, and when 
Milton wrote, " lust hard by hate," saying much, he 
yet did not say all ; — but the two forms in which it 
will mainly display itself; and, out of a sense that 
the latter belongs to it quite as much as the former, 
Josephus (Antt. i. 11. 1) characterizes the men of 
Sodom as being vfipurrai to men, no less than aae^ 
/Sek to God. He applies exactly the same phrase 
on a later occasion {AnM. v. 10. 1) to the sons of 
Eli; indicating on each occasion presently after, 
that by this i^pi^ which he charged on those Mid 
these, he intended an assault on the chastity of 
others ; cf. Plutarch, Demet. 24 ; Lucian, Dial. Dear. 
vi. 1 ; and the article *'T/8/)€<»9 iiicr\ in Pauly's Enr 
cydopadie. The true antithesis to vfipumi^ is o-ath- 
(f^ptov (Xenophon, Apol. Soo. 19 ; Ages. x. 2). 

The three words, then, are very broadly distin- 
guishable from one another, have very different 
provinces of meaning severally belonging to each, 
and present to us an ascending scale of guili, snch 
as I sought to seize at the first, when I observed, 
that the three severally' expressed a sin in word, in 
thought, and in deed. 



lOCW TB8TA1ISHT. 145 



§ XXX. dvri'Xpi'fTTO^j '^€W&5;^WTT0^. 

The word dvrixpurro^ is peculiar to the Epistlea 
of St. John, occurring five times in them ; 1 Ep. it 
18, bis ; ii. 22 ; iv. 3 ; 2 Ep. 7 ; and no where be- 
sides. But, although St John only has the word, 
St. Paul has, in common with him, a designation 
of the person of this great adversary, and of the 
marks by which he shall be recognized ; for there 
can be no doubt that the avOpamo^ t^9 afiaprLa^^ 
the vto9 TTj<i aircolXeia^, the avo/109 of 2 Thess. ii. 3, 
8, are all of them other designations of the same 
person (see Augustine, De Oiv. Deiy xx. 19, 2) ; and, 
indeed, to St. Paul and to that passage in his wri- 
tings we are indebted for our fullest instruction 
ccmceming this great enemy of Christ and of God, 
Passing by, as not relevant to our purpose, many 
of the discussions to which the mysterious announce- 
ment of such a coming foe has naturally given rise, 
as, for instance, whether we are to understand by 
the Antichrist a single person or a line of persons, 
a person or a system, there is only one of these 
questions which has a right t^ occupy us here; 
namely, what the force is of avri in this composi- 
tion J does avrlxpf'OTo^; imply one who sets himself 
up aguimt Christ, or one who sets himself up mth^ 
7 



14A STKOMTMS OF THE 

atedd of Christ ? Is he an open foe, who seeks vio- 
lently to usurp his seat ; or a false friend, that pro- 
fesses to hold it in his name 2 

There is no settling this matter off-hand, as some 
are in so great a hurry to do ; seeing that avri^ in 
composition, has both these forces. It is used often 
in the sense of svhHituMon; thus, avrtlSaaiXewj he 
who is instead of the king, 'prorex,' * viceroy;' 
avOvitaro^^ he who is instead of the consul, * procon- 
sul;' avTiBenrvo^, he who fills the place at a feast 
of an absent guest ; avrtkvrpovy the ransom paid in- 
stead of a person. Then, secondly, there is in avri 
oftGD. the sense of opposition^ as in avrCdect^j atn-^ 
Xoyittj avTiK€ifi€V(y; : atid still more to the point, 
more exact parallels to avr'vxpurrof;^ as expressing 
not merdy the fact of opposition, but, in the latter 
half of the word, the very object against which the 
opposition is directed, canivofiia (see Suicer, Thes. 
s. v.), opposition to law ; avrlx^tpj the thumb, as set 
over againstUie hand ; airr^X.409, lying over against, 
and so exposed to, the sun ; ^Avrucdrav^ the title 
which Csesar gave to a book which he wrote against 
Cato ; avTiOeo^ — not indeed in Homer, where it is 
applied to Polyphemus {Od. i. 70), and to the suit- 
ors (xiv. 18), and must mean * godlike,' that is, in 
str^igth and power; — but yet, in later use, as in 
Philo ; with whom avriJB^o^ vork {De Conf. Lvthg. 
10) ca& be no other than the ^ adverea Deo mens ; ' 



NEW TESTAMENT. 147 

and so in the Christian Fathers. And the jests 
about an ^Antipater' who sought to murder his 
father, to the effect that he was ^epwwfio^^ would 
be utterly pointless, if ami in composition did not 
bear this meaning. I will not cite ^Avripcd^ij where 
the force of avri is more questionable ; and exam- 
ples in sufficient number have been quoted already 
to prove that in words compounded with ai/r/, some 
imply substitution, some opposition ; which being 
so, they have equally erred, who, holding one view 
of Antichrist or the other, have affirmed that the 
word itself decided the matter in their favour. It 
does not so ; but leaves the question to be settled 
by other considerations. (See on this word avri- 
')(pu7To^ a masterly discussion by Liicke, Comm. ub, 
die Brief e des Johannes^ pp. 190 — 194.) 

For myself, St. John's words seem to me deci- 
sive on the matter, that resistance to, and defiance 
of, Christ, not the false assumption of his character 
and offices, is the essential mark of Antichrist ; that 
which, therefore, we should expect to find embodied 
in his name ; thus see 1 John ii. 22 ; 2 John 7 ; and 
in the paa^el passage, 2 Thess. ii. 4, he is 6 avriKei- 
fi€vo<;j where none will deny that the force of avrt 
is that of opposition : and in this sense, if not all, 
yet many of the Fathers have understood the word. 
Thus Tertullian {De Prcesc. Em. 4): Qui Anti- 
christi, nisi Christi rebelles % He is, in Theophy- 



148 SYNONYMS OF THE 

lact's language, ivavrlo^ r^ Xpcar^y * WiderchanAtj^ 
as the Gemans have rightly rendered it ; one who 
shall not pay so much homage to God's word as to 
assert its fulfilment in himself, for he shall deny 
that word altogether ; hating even erroneous wor- 
ship, because it is worship at all, hating much more 
the Church's worship in spirit and in truth ; who, 
on the destruction of every religion, every acknow- 
ledgment that man is submitted to higher powers 
than himself, shall seek to establish his own throne ; 
and, for God's great truth, * God is man,' to substi- 
tute his own lie, ' Man is God.' 

The term ylrevBoxpi'OTo^y with which we proceed 
to compare it, occurs only twice in the New Testa- 
ment ; or, if we count, not how often it has been 
written, but how often it was spoken, only once ; for 
the two passages (Matt. xxiv. 24 ; Mark xiii. 22) are 
records of the same discourse. In form the word 
resembles so many others which appear to have 
been combined of yjrevSo^ and almost any other sub- 
stantive at will. Thus, >/rei/8a7r6(rTo\o9, -^euSa&X^, 
'^€u8o8t8acrAcaXo9, '^€i/So7rpo<^7;T979, ^IrevSofidpTVp^ all 
in the New Testament; the last also in Plato. So, 
too, in ecclesiastical Greek, 'yjrevBoTrotfA'qv, ylrevSoXor 
rpiay and in classical, yjrevSdyyeXo^ (Homer), y^^evSo- 
fiavTc^ (Herodotus), and a hundred more. The -^ci^- 
S6)(pi<TTo<; is not one who denies the being of a 
Christ ; on the contrary, he builds on the world*8 



NEW TESTAMENT. 149 

expectations of such a person ; only he appropriates 
these to himself, blasphemously aflSirms that he is 
the Foretold One, in whom God's promises and 
men's expectations are fulfilled. Thus Barchochab, 
or " the son of the Star," — as claiming the prophecy 
at Kumb. xxiv. 17 he called himself, — who, in 
Adrian's reign, stirred up again the smouldering 
embers of Jewish insurrection into a flame so fierce 
that it consumed himself with more than a million 
of his fellow-countrymen, — he was a ^IrevSoxpto-rof;: 
and such have been that long series of blasphemous 
pretenders and impostors, the felse Messiahs, who, 
since the rejection of the true, have, in almost every 
age, flattered and betrayed the expectation of the 
Jews. 

The distinction, then, is plain. The avri'xpicro^ 
denies that there is a Christ ; the '^evio'Xpi^To^ af- 
firms himself to be the Christ. Both alike make 
war against the Christ of God, and would set them- 
selves, though under diflferent pretences, on the 
throne of his glory. And yet, while the words have 
this broad distinction between them, while they 
represent two different manifestations of the king- 
dom of wickedness, we ought not to forget that 
there is a sense in which the final Antichrist will be 
a Pseudochrist as well ; even as it will be the very- 
character of that last revelation of hell to absorb 
into itself, and to reconcile for one last assault 



150 SYNONYMS OF TBE 

against the truth, all anterior and subordinate forms 
of evil. He will not, it is' true, call himself Ohrist, 
for he will be filled with deadliest hate both against 
the name and offices, as against the whole spirit and 
temper, of Jesus of Nazareth, now the exalted King 
of Glory. But, inasmuch as no one can resist the 
truth by a mere negation, he must offer and oppose 
something positive in the room of that faith which 
he will assail and endeavour utterly to abolish. 
And thus we may certainly conclude, that the final 
Antichrist will present himself to the world as, in 
a sense, its Messiah ; not, indeed, a^ the Messiah of 
prophecy, the Messiah of God, but still as the 
world's saviour ; as one, who, if men will follow 
him, will make their blessedness, giving to them the 
full enjoyment of a present material earth, instead 
of a distant and shadowy heaven ; abolishing those 
troublesome distinctions, now the fruitful sources of 
so much disquietude and pain ; those, namely, be- 
tween the Church and the world, between the spirit 
and the flesh, between holiness and sin, between 
good and evil. It will follow, therefore, that how- 
ever he will not assume the name of Ohrist, and so 
will not, in the letter, be a '^evSoxpioTo^, yet, 
usurping to himself Christ's offices, presenting him- 
self to the world as the true centre of its hopes, as 
the satisfier of its needs and healer of its hurts, he 
will in fact take up into himself all names and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 151 

t 

forms of blasphemy, will be the ^^evBixptirro^ and 
the avTL'^^piaTo^ at once. 



§ xxxi. — jJLokvvoD^ fiiaipoD. 

We have translated both these words, as often 
as they occur (the first, at 1 Cor. viii. 7 ; Rev. iii. 
4 ; xiv. 4 ; the second, at John xviii. 28 ; Tit. i. 15 ; 
Heb. xii.'15 ; Jude 8), invariably by the one English 
word, ' defile,' a word which doubtless covers them 
both. At the same time there exists a certain dif- 
ference between them, or at least between the 
images on which they repose — this namely, that 
fjLoXvveiv is properly ^ to besmear ' or ' besmirch,' as 
with mud or filth, ^todefoul;' which, indeed, is 
only another form of the word ' defile ; ' thus Aris- 
totle {Hist An. vi. 17. 1) speaks of swine, t^ tttjX^ 
fio\vvovT€<; iavrov<; I cf. Plato, Pol. vii. 535 e; Cant. 
V. 3 ; while jicaiveiv^ in its primary sense and usage, 
is not ' to smear,' as with matter, but ' to stain,' as 
with colour. The first corresponds with the Latin 
^ inquinare ' (Horace, Sat i. 8. 37), ' spurcare,' (itself 
probably from ^ porcus '), and is thus exactly equiv- 
alent to the German * besudeln ; ' the second with 
the Latin ' maculare,' and the German * beflecken.' 

It will follow from what has been said, that while, 



152 sTNOirois OF tub 

in a secondary and ethical sense, both w6rds have 
an equally dishonorable signification, the fidkuafi^ 
a-apKo^ (2 Cor. vii. 1) being no other than the jubida- 
fiara rod Koafiov (2 Pet. ii. 20), this will only hold 
good so long as the words are figuratively and ethi- 
cally taken ; so taken, fiuiivetv is the standing word 
in classical Greek to express the profaning or un- 
* hallowing of aught (Plato, Legg.ix. 868 a/ Tim,. 69 
d; Sophocles, Antig. 1031). In a Kteral sense, on 
the contrary, fuaivetp may be used in good part, just 
as, in English, we speak of the stai/nrng of glass, 
the stamvng of ivory (see an example of this, Tl. iv. 
141), and as, in Latin, the ' macula ' need not of 
necessity be also a ' labes ; ' fiokuvevvj on the other 
hand, admitting of such better use as little in a 
literal as in a figurative sense. 



§ xxxii. — TTotSela, vovOeaia. 

The chief inducement to attempt a discrimina- 
tion of these synonyms lies in the fact of their oc- 
curring together at Eph. vi. 4, and being often there 
not distinguished at all, or erroneously distin- 
guished. 

HmZeia is one of those many words, into which 
the more earnest spirit of revealed religion has put 



• NEW TESTAMENT. 163 

a deeper meaning than it knew of, till that took 
possession of it ; the new wine by a wondrous pro- 
cess making new even the old vessel into which it 
was poured. For the Greeks, TraiSeia was simply 

* education;^ nor, in all the many definitions of 
iraiZela^ which are to be found in Plato, is there so 
much as the slightest prophetic anticipation of the 
new force whi(^ the word should obtain. But the 
deeper apprehension of those who had learned that 
" foolishness is bound in the heart " alike " of a 
child " and of a man, while yet "the rod of correc- 
tion may drive it far from him " (Pro v. xxii. 15), led 
them, in assuming the word, to bring into it a fur- 
ther thought ; they felt and understood that all ef- 
fectual instruction for the sinful children of men, 
includes and implies chastening, or, as we are ac- 
customed to say, out of a sense of the same truth, 

* correction.' * 

Two definitions of iraiieia^ — the one by a great 
heathen philosopher, the other by a great Christian 
theologian, — may be fruitfully compared. This is 
Plato's definition (Legg. 659 d) : iratheia fiev iad^ 17 
TraiSoov oKKrj re kol ayooyf) tt/oo? rbv \nro rod vofiov 
Xoyov opOov €lp7)/jLivov : and this is that of Basil the 
Great {In JProv. 1) : eanv 17 iratZeia aya>yij ri^ ax^e- 

* The Greek, indeed, acknowledged, to a certain extent, the 
same, in his secondary use of iLKSKcurrost which, in its primary, 
meant simply *tbe unchastised.' 
7* 



164 SYNONYMS OF THE 

7ufio9 Tp '^iryJO) hntrovfa^ TroTCKaKi^ r&v ano Kcucia^ 
/cr}\iBa)v avrrjv €KKa6aipovaa. For those who felt and 
acknowledged that which is asserted in the second 
clause of this last definition, the word came to sig- 
nify, not simply ' eruditio,' but, as Augustine ex- 
presses it, who has noticed the change {Enarr. in 
Ps. cxviii. 66), ^per molestias eruditio.' And this is 
quite the predominant use of iraiZeia and irai^vew 
both in the Septuagint and in the New Testament 
(Lev. xxvi. 18 ; Ps. vi. 1 ; Isa. liii. 5 ; Sirac. xxii. 6 ; 
fjbdaTtye; xal TraiSeia : Luke xxiii. 16 ; Heb. xii. 5, 
7, 8 ; Rev. iii. 19, and often). The only occasion in 
the New Testament upon which ircuZeveiv occurs in 
the old Greek sense, is Acts vii. 22. Listead of 
" nurture " at Eph. vi. 4, which is hardly strong 
enough a word, ' discipline,' I am persuaded, would 
have been preferable — the laws and ordinances of 
tlie Christian household, the transgression of which 
will induce correction, being indicated by iratheia. 

Noudeaiaj for which the more Attic Greek would 
have had vovOerla or vovOeTtiais (Lobeck, Phrynir 
chu8^ pp. 513, 520), is more successftdly rendered, 
' admonition ; ' which, however, as we must not for- 
get, has been defined by Cicero thus : Admonitio 
est quasi lenior objurgatio. Exactly so much is in- 
tended by vovOeala here ; the training by word — 
by* the word of encouragement, when no more than 
this is wanted, but also by the word of remonstrance, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 155 

of reproof, of blame, where these may be required ; 
as set oyer against the training by act and by dis- 
cipline, which is iraiBeia. It seems to me, therefore, 
that Bengel, who so seldom misseft, has yet missed 
here the distinction, who, on the words, iv TrcuSeia 
KOi vovOeala, has this note : Hamm altera occurrit 
ruditati; altera oblivioni et levitati. Utraque et 
sermonem et reliquam disciplinam includit. In 
support of that which has been urged above, and 
in evidence that vovdeaia is the training by word of 
mouth, such combinations as the following, iraptu- 
vea€t<; koX vovOeaiai (Plutarch, De Coh. Irdy 2) ; vov- 
BercKol \6yot (Xenophon, Mem, i. 2. 21) ; SiSaxh ^«i 
vov0eTrjai<; (Plato, Pol. 399 b) ; vovd^Teiv ical SiSda- 
Keiv {Prot. 823 (?), may be adduced. 

Relatively, then, and as by comparison with 
iravSeia, voudeffia is the milder term ; while yet its 
mention, associated with that other, teaches us that 
this too is a most needful element of Christian edu- 
cation ; that the TraiBela without it would be very 
incomplete ; even as, when years advance, and there 
is no longer a child to deal with, it must give place 
to, or rather be swallowed up in, the voudeala alto- 
gether. And yet the vovOeaLa itself, where need is, 
may be earnest and severe enough. The word in- 
dicates much more than a mere Eli-remonstrance : 
" Nay, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear " 
(1 Sam. ii. 24) ; indeed, of Eli it is expressly re* 



166 SYNONYMS OF THE 

corded, in respect of those sons: ovk ivcvffirei 
mnov<: (iii. 12). In Plutarch alone we find the word 
united with /x€^'^t9 {Cory, Prcec. 13) ; with '\^o^o^ 
{De Adul. et Am. 17) ; and vovderelv to have con- 
tinually, if not always, the sense of admonishing 
y)ith llame {li. 37 ; De Prof, in Virt. 11 ; Conj. 
PrcBC. 22). Jerome, then, is only partially in the 
right, when he desires to get rid, at Eph. vi. 4, of 
' correptione,' which he found in the Vulgate, and 
which still keeps its place there. This he did, on 
the ground that in vovOeala no rebuke nor austerity 
is implied, as in * correptio ' there certainly is : 
Quam correptionem nos legimus, melius in Grseco 
dicitur vovOeala^ qusa admonitionem magis et ervdi^ 
. tionem quam aicsteritatem sonat. Undoubtedly, in 
vovOeaia such i^not of necessity implied, and there- 
fore * correptio ' is not its happiest rendering ; but 
the word does not exclude, nay implies this, when- 
ever it may be required ; the derivation, from vov<$ 
and TiffrjjUj involves as much ; whatever is needed 
to cause the monition to be taken home, is implied 
in the word. 

In claiming for vovOeaia^ as compared with and 
discriminated from TraiSeia, that it is predominantly 
the admonition Jy word, which is also plainly the 
view that our translators have taken of it, I would 
not at all deny that both it and the verb vovOerup 
are used to express correction 5y deed^ but only af 



NEW TUSTAHSNT. 157 

firm of the other — the appeal to the reasonable 
facnltieB — that it is the prevailing use of both ; so 
that in such phrases as these of Plato : pdfiSov vov- 
deniavi; {Zegff. 700 c) ; irXiryak iwvdereiv {Legg. 879 
d\ the word is used in a secondary and vnyproper^ 
and therefore more emphatic^ sense. Such passages 
are exactly parallel to that in Judges, where it is 
said of Gideon, that "he took thorns of the wilder- 
ness and briers, and with them he tcmghi the men 
of Succoth " (Judg. viii. 16) ; on the strength of 
which language, or of any number of similar uses, 
no one would seek to deprive the verb ' to teach ' 
ol* having, as its primary meaning, to communicate 
orally knowledge from one to another. 



§ xxxiii. — a<l>€in^, irdpeai^. 

"A^ab^; is the usual word by which forgiveness, 
or remission of sins, is expressed in the New Testa- 
ment. Derived from aj>ififM>, the image which un- 
derlies it is, of course, that of a releasing or letting 
go ; probably the year of jubilee, called constantly 
ft-09, or &4avro9, t% a^<reQ>9> or simply a^at^ (Lev. 
XXV. 31, 40 ; xxvii. 24), and in which all debts were 
to be forgiven, suggested the higher application of 
the word. It occurs with considerable frequency, 



158 SYNONYMS OF THE 

though oftener in St. Luke than in all the other 
books of the New Covenant put together. On a 
single occasion, however, the term Trdpeat^ r&v 
afxapTfjfidrctyv occurs (Rom. iii. 25). Our translators 
have not noticed, or at least have not marked in 
their Version, the variation in the Apostle's phrase, 
but render irdpeais here as they have rendered aj>er 
a I/; elsewhere ; and many have since justified them 
in this, having, after consideration of the subject, 
denied that any difference was intended by him. 
Others again, and as I believe more rightly, are 
persuaded that St. Paul changed his word not 
without a reason, but of intention, and because he 
wished to say something which Trdpeat^ does ex- 
press adequately and accurately, and which ajteai^ 
would not. 

It is known to many, that Cocceius with those 
of his school made much, of the variation of words 
here, finding herein a great support for a favourite 
assertion of theirs, that there was no remission of 
sins, in the fullest sense of the words, under the 
Old Covenant, no rekeiaxn^ (Heb. x. 1 — 4), no entire 
abolition of sin even for the faithful themselves, but 
only a present praetermission {irdpeaisi)^ or dissimula- 
tion, upon God's part, in consideration of the sacrifice 
which was one day to be. On this matter a violent 
controversy raged among the theologians of Hol- 
land, at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of 



NSW TESTAMENT. 159 

the following century, wluch was carried on with 
an unaccountable acrimony ; and for a brief history 
of which the reader may turn to Deyling, Obea, Sac. 
vol. V. p. 209 ; Vitringa, Obss. Sao. vol. iv. p. 3 ; 
Venema, Diss. Sao. p. 72 ; while the fullest state- 
ment of what Coeceius did mean, and in his own 
words, may be found in his treatise, UtUitas Did- 
tmctionis dAM/i'um YoodhuLorwm, Scripimrmn^ irapi- 
<r€»9 et a^icecK, 0pp. vol. ix. p. 121. Those who 
at that time opposed the Cocceian scheme, denied 
that there was any distinction between a^(n<: and 
irap€<n<;. But in this they erred: the Cocceians 
were undoubtedly wrong, in saying that for the 
faithful there was only a irdpcaL^ and no &^at<;y 
dfmpTfjfidTcovj in applying to them what was assert- 
ed in respect of the world under the Old Covenant ; 
but they were right in maintaining that irdpeo'c^ 
was not purely and entirely equivalent with Sweats. 
Beza, indeed, had already drawn attention to the 
distinction. Having in his Latin Version, as first 
published, taken no notice of it, he acknowledges 
at a later period his error, saying, Haec duo pluri- 
mum inter se differunt ; and now rendering irdpeci^i 
by * dissimulatio.' 

In the first place, the derivation would d priori 
suggest a difference of meaning ; if a^ai^: is re- 
mission, irdpetTi^y from irapirjfiiy will be naturally 
*^(Bformission ' — the irdp^trus dfiaprfffrnTavy the 



160 STKONTIIS OF THB 

prcBiemmsion or poising hy of sins for the present, 
leaving it open in the future either entirely to remUj 
or else to punidi them, as may seem good. And the 
classical usage both of irapthcu and of irdpecvs 
bears out this distinction. Thus Xenophon {Sipp. 
vii. 10) : afJMprrifiara ov xp^ irapUvai cucoKaara* Of 
Herod Josephus tells us, that being desirous to 
punish a certain offence, yet for other considerations 
he passed it by (Antt. xv. 3. 2) : iraprjtee r^v afiap- 
riav. When the Son of Sirach (Ecplus. xxiii. 2) 
prays to God that He would not ^'jpdsa hy " his sins, 
he assuredly does not use ov fiif irapy as = oi fitf 
cuf^y but only asks that he may not be without a 
wholesome chastisement following close <m his 
transgressions. So, too, on the contrary, when in 
proof that irdpeai^ is equivalent to S4>€(n^y the fol- 
lowing passage, from Dionysius of Halicamassus 
{AnM. Bom. vii. 37) is adduced : rijv fihf oKoax^prj 
irdpeaiv oi% evpovroy rtjv Se ek j(p6vov icrov fj^how 
avafioXffP eXa/SoVj it is not wdpeac^^ but 6\o<r)(€pif(i 
irdpeab^y which is equal to a<l)€a'c^, and no doubt the 
historian added the epithet out of a feeling that 
irdpeai^ would have insuflSciently expressed his 
meaning without it. 

Having seen, then, that there is a great prvmA 
fade probability, that St. Paul intends something 
different by the irdpexTt^ dfiapTTjfidrmVy in the only 
place where he thinks good to use this phrase, from 



NSW TBBTAME2IT. 161 

that which he intends in the many where he em- 
ploys a^eai^j that passage itself, namely Kom. iii. 
25, may now be considered more closely. It appears 
in our Version : " Whom God hath set forth to be a 
|H:opitiation through faith in his blood, to declare 
his righteousness for the remission of sins th^t are 
past, through the forbearance of God." I would 
venture to render it thus: "Whom God hath set 
forth to be a propitiation through &ith in his blood, 
for a manifestation of his righteousness, lecause of 
thejprcBiermission [Bia tt^p irdpeawj not itd, rrfi ira- 
/j€<r€ft)9], in the forbearance of God, of the sins that 
went before;" and the exact meaning which I 
should attach to the words is this — " There needed," 
St Paul would say, " a signal manifestation of the 
righteousness of God, on account of the long , prse- 
termission or passing over of sins, in his infinite 
forbearance, without any adequate expression of his 
wrath against them, during all those long years 
which preceded the coming of Christ ; which mani- 
festation of God's righteousness found place, when 
He set forth no other and no less than his own Son 
to be the propitiatory sacrifice for sin." There had 
been a long period during which God's extreme in- 
dignation against sin and sinners was not pro- 
nounced ; the time, that is, previous to the Incarna- 
tion. Of course, this connivance of God, this his 
holding his peace, was only partial ; for St. Paul has 



162 SYNONYMS OF THE 

himself just before declared, that the '^ath of God 
was revealed from heaven against all unrighteons- 
ness of men (Kom. i. 18) ; and has traced in a few 
fearful lines some of the ways in which this revela- 
tion of his wrath displayed itseli* (i. 24 — 32). Yet 
still, it was the time during which He suffered the 
nations to walk in their own ways (Acts xiv. 16) ; 
they were the times of i^orance which God winked 
at (Acts xvii. 30), in other words, of the avo^ '^^^ 
Seov. But this position in regard of sin could, in 
the very nature of things, be only transient and 
provisional. With a man, the prsetermission, or 
'prseterition,' as Hammond would render it, of sins 
will very often be identical with the remission, the 
irdpedi^ will be one with the atfyea-i^. He forgets ; 
he has not power to bring the long past into judg- 
ment, even if he would ; or he has not righteous 
energy enough to will it. But with an absolutely 
righteous God, the irapeaL^ can only be temporary, 
and must always find place with a looking on to a 
final decision ; every sin must at last either be ab- 
solutely forgiven, or adequately avenged. In the 
meanwhile, the very irapeai^ might seem to call in 
question the absolute righteousness of Him, who 
was thus content to pass by and to connive. God 
held his peace, and it was only too near to the evil 
thought of man to think wickedly that He was such 
an one as himself, morally indifferent to good and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 168 

to evil ; but now {iv r^ vvv tcatp^) God, by the 
Bacrifice of his Son, has rendered snch a perverse 
misunderstanding of his meaning in the past dis- 
simulation of sin for ever impossible. Bengel ex- 
presses well this same view, which I cannot doubt 
is the correct one, of the passage : Objectum prseter- 
missionis [9ra/3€<r6a>?], peccata; tolerantise [ai'ox^?], 
peccatores, contra quos non est persecutus Deus jus 
Buum. Et hsec et ilia quam diu fuit, non ita appa- 
ruit justitia Dei : non enim tam vehementer visus 
est irasci peccato, sed peccatorem sibi relinquere, 
dfA€\etvj negligere, Heb. viii. 9. At in sanguine 
Christi et morte propitiatorill ostensa est Dei jus- 
titia, cum vindictfi adversus peccatum ipsum, ut 
esset ipse Justus, et cum zelo pro peccatoris libera- 
tione, ut esset ipse justificans^ Compare Hammond' 
{in loc.)y who has seized excellently well the true 
distinction between the two words. 

He, then, that is partaker of the a^eot?, has his 
sins forgiven, so that, unless he bring them back 
upon himself by new and further disobedience 
(Matt, xviii. 32, 34 ; 2 Pet. i. 9 ; ii. 20), they shall 
not be imputed to him, or mentioned agaiust him 
any more ; while the 7rdpe(n<; is indeed a benefit, but 
a very subordinate one ; it is the present passing by 
of sin, the suspension of its punishment, the not 
shutting up of all ways of mercy against the sinner, 
the giving to him of space and helps for repentance, 



164 8Y1C0NYMS OF THE 

as it is said at Wisd. ad. 24 : irapopa^ afiapr^fuiTa 
avdpmrfov eh fierdvoiav. K this repentance follow, 
then the Trdpeat^ will be swallowed up in the a(f)€<n<:, 
but if not, then the punishment, suspended but not 
averted, in its due time will arrive (Luke xiii. 9). 



§ xxxiv. — fiwpoXoyuij ala')(po\oyia, evrpaireKia, 

M(opo\oylaj a word employed by Aristotle, but 
not of frequent use till the later Greek, is rendered 
well in the Vulgate, on the one occasion of its oc- 
currence in Scripture, Eph. v. 4, by ' stultiloquium,' 
a compound word, it may be first coined by Plautus 
{Mil. Glor. ii. 3. 25) ; although one which did not 
find more favour wid currency in the after language 
of Rome, than the * stultiloquy ' with which Jeremy 
Taylor sought to reproduce it, with us. It will in- 
clude not merely the irap pfjfm apyov of our Lord, 
(Matt. xii. 36), but in good part also the ttS? X6709 
aairpo^ of his Apostle (Eph. iv. 29) ; discourse, as 
everything else about the Christian, needing to be 
seasoned with the salt of grace, and being in danger 
of growing first insipid, and then corrupt, without 
it. 

It seems to me, that those who stop short with 
the apya pijfiaray as if those alonjB were included in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 165 

tiie wordy fail to exhaust the ftilness of its meaning. 
Thus Calvin too weakly : Sermones inepti ac inanes, 
nulliusque frugis ; and even Jeremy Taylor, in his 
sermons On the Good and JEvil Tongvs (Serm.'^xxxii. 
' pt. 2), hardly comes up to the full force of the word. 
The remarkable passage in which he unfolds the 
meaning of the fimpoKoyia begins thus: ^'That 
which is here meant by stultiloquy or foolish speak- 
ing is the * lubricum verbi,' as St. Ambrose calls it, 
the ' slipping with the tongue ' which prating peo- 
ple often suffer, whose discourses betray the vanity 
of their spirit, and discover * the hidden man of the 
heart.' " In heathen writings, fimpoXoyla may very 
well be used as little more than equivalent to aSo- 
Xeaxia^ ' random talk,' and fKopoXoyecv as equivalent 
to Xrjpew (Plutarch, De Ga/rr. 4) ; but words obtain 
a new earnestness when they are assumed into the 
ethical terminology of Christ's school. 'Not in seek- 
ing to enter fully into this word's meaning, ought 
we to leave out of sight the greater emphasis which 
the words ' fool,' ' foolish,' * folly,' obtain in the lan- 
guage of Scripture, than elsewhere they have, or 
can have. There is the positive of folly as well as 
the negative to be taken account of, when we are 
weighing the force of fAtopoXoyia : it is that * talk of 
fools,' which is folly and sin together. 

Al<T')(po\jorf'ia also occurs only once in the New 
Testament (Col. iii-t 8), and is not to be confounded 



166 SYNONYMS OF THE 

with aurxporrj^j Eph. v. 4. By it the Greek Fathers 
(see Suicer, Thea. s. v.), and most expositors after 
them, have understood obscene discourse, ' turpilo- 
quium,' such communication as ministers to wan- 
tonness, SxVf^ TTopvela^j as Chrysostom calls it 
Thus Clemens of Alexandria has a chapter in his 
PcsdagoguB (ii. 6), ITepl alaxpoy^ia^:^ in which he 
recognises no other mewiing but this. Nor is it 
otherwise with our own Yersion, which has rendered 
the word by ^filthy communication.' Now, beyond 
a doubt, aurxpoXoyia has sometimes this sense pre- 
dominantly, or even exclusively ; thus Xenophon, 
De Lac. Rep. v. 6 ; Aristotle, DeR&p. vii. 15 ; Epic- 
tetus, Man. xxxiii. 16 ; and see Becker's ChaHJdeSy 
1st ed. vol. ii. p. 264. But very often, indeed more 
generally, by alaxpoXoyCa is indicated all foul- 
mouthed abusiveness of every kind, not excluding 
this, one of the most obvious kinds, most ready to 
hand, and most offensive, but still not intending by 
the alaxpci of the word, to point at such alone. 
Thus Polybius, viii. 13. 8 ; xxxi. 10. 4 : aurxpoKoyla 
teal \oi£opla Karh rod jSaatSJo)^: and compare the 
phrase alo-xpoXoyia i^* icpoh. Plutarch also {De 
Lib. Educ. 14), denouncing all ahrxpoKoyia as un- 
becoming to youth ingenuously brought up, includes 
in it every license of the ungovemed tongue, em- 
ploying itself in the abuse of others; and I am 
persuaded that St. Paul, using the word, is forbid- 



HEW TESTAMENT. 167 

ding the same. The context or company in which 
the word is fonnd goes far to prove this ; for all the 
other things which he is here prohibiting, are the 
outbreaks of a lovdeaa spirit toward our neighbour ; 
and so, I cannot but believe, is this. 

But by far the most interesting word in this 
group remains still to be considered. EvrpafreXiay 
a finely selected word of the world's use, which 
however St. Paul uses not in the world's, sense, like 
its synonyms just considered, is only met with once 
in the New Testament (Eph. v. 4). Derived from 
eS and Tpiireaffacj that which easily turns, and in 
this way adapts itself to the shifting circumstances 
of the moment, to the moods and conditions of 
those with whom at the moment it may deal ; * it 
has not of necessity, nor indeed had it more than 
slightly and occasionally in classical use, that evil 
signification which, in the use of St. Paul, and of 
the ethical writers of the Church, it exclusively ac- 
quired. On the contrary, Thucydides, in that pane- 
gyric of the Athenians which he puts into the 
mouth of Pericles, employs evr/ja^riXG)? (ii. 41) as 
— evKi^vrjToy;^ to characterize the versatility, the 
* versatile ingenium,' of his countrymen. Aristotle 
also, as is well known, gives praise to the evrpaTre- 

' That St Paul himself could be §vrpdx*\os in this, the better 
sense of the word, he has giyen the most illustrious proofs. Acts 
xxvi 29. 



166 SYNONYMS OF THE 

with aurxpoTfj^j Eph. v. 4. By it the Greek Fathers 
(see Suicer, Thes. s. v.), and most expositors after 
them, have understood obscene discourse, ' turpilo- 
qnium,' such communication as ministers to wan- 
tonness, Sxvf^ iropveia^^ as Ohrysostom calls it. 
Thus Clemens of Alexandria has a chapter in his 
PmdagoguB (ii. 6), Hepl ataxpoyjuyla^^ in which he 
recognises no other meaning but this. Nor is it 
otherwise with our own Yersion, which has rendered 
the word by ^filthy communication.' Now, beyond 
a doubt, awr^poXoyta has sometimes this sense pre- 
dominantly, or even exclusively ; thus Xenophon, 
De Lao. Mep. v. 6 ; Aristotle, De Rep. vii. 15 ; Epic- 
tetus, Man. xxxiii. 16 ; and see Becker's Gha/riTdes^ 
1st ed. vol. ii. p. 264. But very often, indeed more 
generally, by alaxpoXoyla is indicated all foul- 
mouthed abusiveness of every kind, not excluding 
this, one of the most obvious kinds, most ready to 
hand, and most offensive, but still not intending by 
the alaxpa of the word, to point at such alone. 
Thus Polybius, viii. 13. 8 ; xxxi. 10. 4 : alaxpoXoyla 
fcal 'KoiZopla Kard, rov PaaCKiay^i \ and compare the 
phrase aurxpoXoyia i^' Upoh. Plutarch also {De 
Lib. Educ. 14), denouncing all alcrxpoXoyla as un- 
becoming to youth ingenuously brought up, includes 
in it every license of the ungovemed tongue, em- 
ploying itself in the abuse of others; and I am 
persuaded that St. Paul, using the word, is forbid- 



HEW TESTAMENT. 167 

ding the same. The context or company in which 
the word is found goes far to prove this ; for all the 
other things which he is here prohibiting, are the 
outbreaks of a lovdesa spirit toward our neighbour ; 
and so, I cannot but believe, is this. 

But by far the most interesting word in this 
group remains still to be considered. EvrpaireXioy 
a finely selected word of the world's use, which 
however St. Paul uses not in the world's, sense, like 
its synonyms just considered, is only met with once 
in the New Testament (Eph. v. 4). Derived from 
eS and rpeTreadaiy that which easily turns, and in 
this way adapts itself to the shifting circumstances 
of the moment, to the moods and conditions of 
those with whom at the moment it may deal ; * it 
has not of necessity, nor indeed had it more than 
slightly and occasionally in classical use, that evil 
signification which, in the use of St. Paul, and of 
the ethical writers of the Church, it exclusively ac- 
quired. On the contrary, Thucydides, in that pane- 
gyric of the Athenians which he puts into the 
mouth of Pericles, employs €VTpairiKa><; (ii. 41) as 
— €v/eAw;T(k)9, to characterize the versatility, the 
* versatile ingenium,' of his countrymen. Aristotle 
also, as is well known, gives praise to the evrpaTre- 

' That St Paul himself could be tirrpdwtXos in this, the better 
senoe of the word, he has giyen the most illustrious proofs. Acts 
xxvi 29. 



168 SYNONTMB OF IHE 

Xo9 or iiriBi^u)^ {Ethic. Nic. iv. 8), as one who keeps 
the due mean between the ^tofAokbx^ ^^^ aypoixo^ 
in whatever pleasanty or banter he may allow him- 
self. He is no mere yeXMTOTrow or buffoon ; never 
exceeds the limits of becoming mirth, nor ceases to 
be the gentleman ; and we find in Plato {Pol. viii. 
663 a) J einpaireXia joined with y(api€VTtafi69 : as it 
is in Plutarch {De Adul. et Am. 7), in Josephus 
{Antt. xii. 4. 3), and in Philo {Leg. ad Cod. 46), 
with x^P*5« 

At the same time, there were not wanting even 
in classical usage, anticipations of that more unfa- 
vourable signification which St. Paul should stamp 
upon the word, though they appear most plainly in 
the adjective evrpdireXo^; : thus, see Isocrates, vii. 
49 ; and Pindar, Pyth. i. 93, where Dissen traces 
well the downward progress of the word : Primum 
est de facilitate in motu, tum ad mores transfertur, 
et indicat hominem temporibus inservientem, dici- 
turque tum de sermone lirbano, lepido, faceto, im- 
primis cum levitatis et assentationis, simulationis 
notatione. In respect of only gradually acquiring 
an unfavourable significance, einpaireXla has a his- 
tory closely resembling that of the Latin ' urbani- 
tas,' which would be the happiest equivalent by 
which to render it, as indeed Erasmus has done ; 
' scurrilitas,' which the Tulgate has, is altogether 
at fault. There needs only to quote in proof the 



NEW TESTAMENT. 169 

words of Oicero, Pro Ccd. 3 : Contumelia, si petu- 
lantius jactatur, convicium; si facetius, nrbanitas 
nominatnr ; which agrees with the striking phrase 
of Aristotle, that the einpaireKla is irewatSevfieurj 
i^pL^i of. Plutarch, Cic. 50. Already ii^ Cicero's 
time (see Rhet, ii. 12) ^ urbanitas ' had begun to ob- 
tain that questionable significance, which, in the 
usage of Tacitus {Iliat ii. 88) and Seneca {De Ird^ 
i. 28), it far more distinctly acquired. 

But the fineness of the form in which evil might 
array itself could not make a Paul tolerant of the 
evil itself; he did not consider that sin, by losing 
all its coarseness, lost half, or «ny part of, its mis- 
chief; on the contrary, that it might so become far 
more dangerous than it was before. In the finer 
talk of the world, its 'persiflage,' its 'badinage,' 
there is that which would attract many, whom scur- 
rile buffoonery would only revolt and repel ; who 
would in like manner be in no danger of lending 
their tongue or ear to foul-mouthed abuse. A far 
subtler sin is noted here than in either of the other 
words, and not a few wbuld be now touched, whom 
the preceding monition had failed to find out. Thus, 
Bengel {in loc.) has well observed : Hsec subtilior 
quam turpitudo aut stultiloquium ; nam mgenio 
nititmr^ and Jerome : Pe prudenti mente descendit, 
et consulto appetit qusedam vel urbana verba, vel 
rustica, vel turpi^j^ vel faceta, I should oxily object 
8 



168 SYNONYMS OF IHE 

Xo9 or iinik^io^ {Ethic. Nic. iv. 8), as one who keeps 
the due mean between the jSwfAoXoxos and aypouco^ 
in whatever pleasanty or banter he may allow him- 
self. He is no mere yeXMroirow or buffoon ; never 
exceeds the limits of becoming mirth, nor ceases to 
be the gentleman ; and we find in Plato {Pol. viii. 
663 a) J evrpaireXia joined with 'xapicvrta-fios : as it 
is in Plutarch {De Advl. et Am. 7), in Josephus 
{Ardt. xii. 4. 3), and in Philo {Leg. ad Cm. 46), 
with x^P^^« 

At the same time, there were not wanting even 
in classical usage, anticipations of that more unfa- 
vourable signification which St. Paul should stamp 
upon the word, though they appear most plainly in 
the adjective evrpdireXo^ : thus, see Isocrates, vii. 
49 ; and Pindar, Pyth. i. 93, where Dissen traces 
well the downward progress of the word : Primum 
est de facilitate in motu, tum ad mores transfertur, 
et indicat hominem temporibus inservientem, dici- 
turque tum de sermone lirbano, lepido, faceto, im- 
primis cum levitatis et assentationis, simulationis 
notatione. In respect of only gradually acquiring 
an unfavourable significance, einpaireXla has a his- 
tory closely resembling that of the Latin * urbani- 
tas,' which would be the happiest equivalent by 
which to render it, as indeed Erasmus has done ; 
* scurrilitas,' which the Yulgate has, is altogether 
at fault. There needs only to quote in proof the 



NEW TESTAMENT. 169 

words of Cicero, Pro C(d. 3 : Contumelia, si petu- 
lantius jactatur, convicium; si facetius, urbanitas 
nominatnr ; which agrees with the striking phrase 
of Aristotle, that the einpaireKla is ireiraiievfAhni 
iPpi<;\ cf. Plutarch, Cic. 50. Already ii^ Cicero's 
time (see Rhet ii. 12) ' urbanitas ' had begun to ob- 
tain that questionable significance, which, in the 
usage of Tacitus {Iliat ii. 88) and Seneca {De Ird^ 
i. 28), it far more distinctly acquired. 

But the fineness of the form in which evil might 
array itself could not make a Paul tolerant of the 
evil itself; he did not consider that sin, by losing 
all its coarseness, lost half, or «ny part of, its mis- 
chief; on the contrary, that it might so become far 
more dangerous than it was before. In the finer 
talk of the world, its 'persiflage,' its 'badinage,' 
there is that which would attract many, whom scur- 
rile buffoonery would only revolt and repel ; who 
would in like manner be in no danger of lending 
their tongue or ear to foul-mouthed abuse. A far 
subtler sin is noted here than in either of the other 
words, and not a few wbuld be now touched, whom 
the preceding monition had failed to find out. Thus, 
Bengel {in loc.) has well observed : Hsec subtilior 
quam turpitudo aut stultiloquium ; nam ingenio 
nitittt/r; and Jerome : T).e prudenti mente descendit, 
et consulto appetit qurodam vel urbana verba, vel 
rustica, vel turpi^^^ vel faceta, I should only object 
8 



170 SYNONYMS OF THE 

to the ' rustica vel turpia,' which belong rather to 
the other forms in which men offend with the tongue 
than to this. It always belongs to the evrpdireXo^^ 
as Chrysostom notes, aarela Xiyeiv. He keeps ever 
in mind (he observation of Cicero {De Orat ii. 58) : 
Hsec ridentnr vel maxime, quae notant et designant 
turpitudinem aliquam non turpiter. There would 
need polish, refinement, knowledge of the world, 
wit, to be an evrpdireXo^ even in this worser sense 
of the word; — although these, of course, enlisted 
in the service of sin, and not in that of the truth. 
The very profligate old man in the Miles Cfloricmcs 
of Plautus, iii. 1. 42 — 52, who at the same time 
prides himself, and with reason, on his wit, his ele- 
gance and refinement (cavillator lepidus, facetus) is 
exactly the evrpdireko^i : and remarkably enough, 
when we remember that evrpaireXia being only ex- 
pressly forbidden once in Scripture, is forbidden to 
Ephesians, we find him bringing out that all this 
was to be expected from him, being that he was an 
Ephesian : Post Ephesi sum natus ; non enim in 
Apulis, non Animulas. % 

While then by all these words are indicated sins 
of the tongue, it is yet with a difference. In pMipo- 
\oyla the ' foolishness, in alaxpoXoyla the foulness, 
in eirrpairekia the false refinement, of discourse 
which is not seasoned with the salt of grace, are es- 
pecially noted. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 171 



§ x^v. — Xarpevw^ Xeirovpyio). 

In both these words lies the notion of service, 
but of service under certain special limitations in 
the second, as compared with the first. Aarpeveiv^ 
as indicated by the words with which it is allied, 
Xdrpt^y 'an hired servant,' \drpov, 'hire,' is properly, 
' to serve for hire.' Already, however, in classical 
Greek both it and Xarpeia are occasionally trans- 
ferred from the service of men to the service of th6 
higher powers ; as by Plato, Apol, 23 c.* rj rov Seov 
'karpeia: cf. Phcedr. 244^; and the meaning, which 
in Scripture is the only one which the words know, 
is anticipated in part. In the Septuagint Xarp&iecv 
is never used to express any other service but either 
that of the true God, or of the false gods of hea- 
thenism. The single seeming exception, Deut. 
xxviii. 48, is not such in fact ; so that Augustine 
has perfect right when he says {De Civ. Dei, x. 1, 
2): Aarpela secundum consuetudinem quS locuti 
sunt qui nobis divina eloquia condiderunt, aut sem- 
per, aut tam frequenter ut psene semper, ea dicitur 
servitus quae pertinet ad colendum Deum. 

AeLTovpyeiv is a word boasting of a somewhat 
nobler beginning ; it signified, at first, to serve the 
state in a public oflSce or function ; from Xeiros 



172 SYNONYMS OF THE 

( = hrjfi6<TL(y;\ and epyov. It resembled XaTpevecv 
in this, that it was occasionally transferred to the 
highest ministry of all, the ministry of the gods 
(Diodorus Siculus, i. 21). When the Christian 
Church was forming its terminology, which it did 
partly by shaping new words, but partly also by 
elevating old ones to higher than their previous 
uses, it more readily, as regarded the latter, adopted 
those which had before been employed in the civil 
and political life of the Greeks, than such as had 
played their part in religious matters; and this, 
even when it was seeking for the expression of reli- 
gious truth. The reasons which induced this were 
the same which caused it more willingly to turn 
basilicas, — buildings, that is, which had been used 
in civil life, — than temples, into churches ; namely, 
because they were less haunted with the clinging 
associations of heathenism. Of the fact itself we 
have a notable example in the words Xeirovpyo^, 
XeiTovpylay Xetroupyelv. It is probably well known 
to all how prominent a place in ecclesiastical lan- 
guage these words assumed. At the same time, in 
this case also the transition had been made more 
easy, the way for it had been prepared, by the Sep- 
tuagint ; and by Philo {De Prof. 464). Neither by 
these, however, nor yet by the Christian writers 
who followed, were the words of this group so en- 
tirely alienated from their primary uses as Xarpeia 



NEW TESTAMENT. 173 

and \aTp€V€iv had been; being still occasionally 
used for the ministry unto men (2 Sam. xiii. 18 ; 1 
Kings X. 5 ; 2 Kings ir. 43 ; Rom. xv. 27 ; Phil. ii. 
25, 30). 

From the distinction already existing between 
XarpevcLv and Xeirovfy/elv, before the Church had 
anything to do with them, namely that Xarpeveiv 
was ' to serve,' XeiTovpyelv, ' to serve in an ofBce and 
miiiistry,' are to be explained the different uses to 
which they are severally turned in the New Testa- 
ment, as, indeed, previously also in the Septuagint. 
To serve God is the duty of all men ; the \arpevecvj 
therefore, and the XarpeCa are demanded of the 
whole people (Exod. iv. 23 ; Deut. x. 12 ; Josh. xxiv. 
31 ; Matt. iv. 10 ; Acts vii. 7 ; Eom. ix. 4) ; but to 
serve Him in special offices and ministries is the 
duty and privilege only of a few, who are set apart 
to the same ; and thus in the Old Testament the 
Xeirovp^elv and the Xeirovpyia are ascribed only to 
the priests and Levites who were separated to min- 
ister in holy things ; they only are \enovpyoi 
(Kumb. iv. 24 ; 1 Sam. ii. 11 ; Nehem. x. 39 ; 
Ezek. xliv. 27) ; which language, mutatis mutandis, 
reappears in the New ; where not merely is that 
old priesthood and ministry designated by this lan- 
guage (Luke i. 23 ; Heb. ix. 21 ; x. 11), but that of 
apostles, prophets, and teachers in the Church (Acts 
xiii. 2 ; Eom. xv. 16 ; Phil. ii. 17), as well as that 



174 SYNONYMS OF THE 

of the Great High Priest of our profession, who is 
T&v ar/t&v XeiTovpyos (Heb. viii. 2).' 

It may be urged against the distinction here 
drawn that Xarpeieiv and Xarpeia are sometimes ap- 
plied to official ministries, as at Heb. ix. 1, 6. This 
is, of course, true ; just as where two circles have 
the same centre, the greater will necessarily include 
the less. The notion of service is such a centre 
here ; in "keirovpyelv this service finds a certdin 
limitation, in that it is service in an office : it fol- 
lows that every Xeirovpyia will of necessity be a 
Xarpeiay but not, vice versli, every Xarpeia a Xevrovp^ 
yia. I know no passage which better brings out 
the distinction between these two words which I 
have sought to trace, than Ecclus. iv. 14, where 
both occur: oi Xarpevovres ainfj [^. e, rrj So<f>ui] 
XeiTovpyijaovatv 'Ayi(p, "They that serve her, 
shall minister to the Holy One." 

' In later ecclesiastical use there has been sometimes the at- 
tempt to push the special application of Xeirovpyia still further, 
and to limit its use to those prayers and offices which stand in 
more immediate relation to the Holy Eucharist 



NEW TESTAMENT. 176 



§ xxxvi. — irhnyij tttcw^^o?. 

In both these words the sense of poverty, and 
of poverty in this world's goods, is involved ; yet 
have they severally meanings which are exclusively 
their own. It is true that Trivrj^; and irrayxik contin- 
ually occur together in the Septuagint, in^the Psalms 
especially, with no rigid demarcation of their mean- 
ings (as at Ps. xxxix. 18 ; Ixxiii. 22 ; Ixxxi. 4 ; cf. 
Ezek. xviii. 12; xxii. 29); very much as our "poor 
and needy ;" and whatever distinction may exist in 
the Hebrew between f-a^ and ''35, the Alexandrian 
translators have either considered it not reproduci- 
ble by the help of these words, or have not cared to 
reproduce it ; for they have no fixed rule in regard 
of them, translating the one and the other by ttt®- 
;^o9 and 7r€iA?;9 alike. Still there are passages which 
show that they were perfectly aware of the distinc- 
tion, and would, where it seemed to them needful, 
maintain it; occasions upon which they employ 
irevq^ (as Deut. xxiv. 16, 17 ; 2 Sam. xii. 1, 3, 4), 
and where, as will presently be evident, TrT^ayxp^ 
would have been manifestly unfit. 

Tlevrys occurs only once in the New Testament (1 
Cor. ix. 9), while irrcoxo^ some thirty or foiiy times. 
Derived from irevofmi^ and connected with ttoi/o?, 



176 SYNONYMS OF THE 

woviofiaiy and the Latin * penuria,' it properly signi- 
fies one so poor that he earns his daily bread by his 
labour; Hesychius calls him well airoSta/coj/o?, as 
one who by his own hands ministers to his own ne- 
cessities. The word does not indicate extreme want, 
or anything approaching to it, any more than the 
* pauper ' and ' paupertas ' of the Latin ; but only 
the ' res angusta ' of one to whom irXowio^ would 
be an inappropriate epithet. What was the popular 
definition of a Trewy? we learn from Xenophon ( J/"^m. 
iv. 2. 37 : roif^ /lev ol/xac /ifj iKavh ey(pvTa^ ek a Set. 
TcKelvj irivijTa^ • roif^ Se ifK^Uo r&v iKav&v irKovciov^. 
nivr)^; was an epithet commonly applied to Socrates 
(Xenophon, (Econ, ii. 3) ; and irevla he claims more 
than once for himself (Plato, Ajpol. 23, o/ 31 o). 
What his irevia was, he explains in the passage from 
Xenophon referred to ; namely, that all which ho 
had, if sold, would not bring five Attic minae. So, 
too, the Ilevkarcu in Thessaly, (if^ indeed, the deri- 
vation of the name from iriveaOai is to stand,) were 
a subject population, but not reduced to abject 
want ; on the contrary, retaining partial rights as 
boors or cultivators of the soil. 

But while the iremj^ is ' pauper,' the tttw^^o^ is 
^mendicus;' he is the * beggar,' and lives not by 
his own labour or industry, but on other men's 
alms (Luke xvi. 20, 21) ; one therefore whom Plato 
would not endure in his ideal State {Zegg. xi. 936 cy 



NEW TESTAMENT. 177 

If indeed we fall back on etymologies, irpotralrr)^ (a 
word which ought to be replaced in tha text at 
John ix. 8)j or eVa/r^y?, would be the more exactly 
equivalent to our 'beggar.' TertuUian long ago 
noted the distinction between tttw^o^ aiid irkvri^ 
{Ach. Ma/rc. iv. 14), for having to do with our 
Lord's words, fiaxapioc ol irroy'xpi (Luke vi. 20), he 
changes the ^^eaXipaupereSj^ which still retains its 
place in the Vulgate, into 'Beati ^nendiciy^ and jus- 
tifies the change, observing. Sic enim exigit inter- 
pretatio vocabuli quod in Grseco est. 

The words then are markedly distinct; the ttcj/i;? 
is so poor that he earns his bread by daily labour, 
the 7rTa>x6<: is so poor that he only obtains his living 
by begging. Tlie tttw^^o? has nothing, the tto^? has 
nothing superfluous. (See Doderlein, Zat. Synon. 
vol. iii. p. 117.) The two, irevla (= paupertas) and 
TTTcoxeia (= egestas), may be sisters, as one in Aris- 
tophanes will have them {Plut. 549) ; but if such, 
yet the latter very far more destitute of the world's 
goods than the former, and indeed Ilevla in that 
passage seems inclined to disallow wholly any such 
near relationship as this. The words of Aristopha- 
nes, in which he plays the synonymist between 
them, have been often quoted : 

VTwxov /icv yap fiios^ tu <ri> Aeyets, (rjv iariv finj^ey l^x^"'^'^' "^^^ ^^ 
TevriToSf C^f <p€i^6fi€yoUt Koi rots tpyois irpoaixovra^ irfpiylyysadai 

8* 



178 SYNONYMS OF THE 



§ xxxvii. — 0vfi6<;, opyijj wapopyi<Tji6<;. 

Qvfio^ and opyrj are found several times together 
in the New Testament, as at Kom. ii. 8 ; Eph. iv. 3 ; 
Col. iii. 8; Eev. xix. 15; often also in the Septua- 
gint, 2 Chron. xxix. 10 ; Mic. v. 15 ; and often also 
in other Greek (Isocrates, xii. 81 ; Polybius, vi. 66. 
11 ; JosephnSj Antt. xx. 5. 3 ; Plutarch, De Coh. 
Ird^ 2) ; nor are they found only in the connexion 
of juxtaposition, but one of them made dependent 
on the other ; thus ^i;/io9 t^9 op^ (Rev. xvi, 9 ; cf. 
Job iii. 17 ; Josh. vii. 26) ; while op^r) Ovfwv^ not 
occurring in the New Testament, is of constant re- 
currence in the Old (Ps. Ixxvii. 49 ; Lam. i. 12 ; 
Isa. XXX. 27 ; Hos. xi. 9). 

When these words, after a considerable anterior 
history, came to settle down on the passion of anger, 
as the strongest of all passions, impulses and desires, 
and to be used predominantly as expressions of it 
(see Donaldson, JVew Oratylus, pp. 675 — 679), the 
distinguishing of them one from another, a good 
deal occupied grammarians and philologers. They 
felt, and rightly, -that the existence of a multitude 
of passages in which the words were perfectly in- 
differently used (as Plato, Zegff, 867), made nothing 
against the fact of such a distinction ; all which, in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 179 

seeking to desynonymize the two, they assumed 
was, that the words could not be indifferently used 
in all cases. The general result of their disquisi- 
tions is, that in dvfi6<i * (connected with dvcuj and 
derived, according to Plato, airo Trj<; dvaeayi^ Crat. 
*4:l9 ^), is more of the turbulent commotion, the 
boiling agitation of the feelings, either presently to 
subside and disappear, — like the Latin 'excandes- 
centia,' which Cicero defines {Tusc. iv. 9), Ira nas- 
cens et modo desistens, — or else to settle down into 
opyn, wherein is more of an abiding and settled 
habit of the mind (4ra inveterata'), with the pur- 
pose of revenge ; the German ' Zom.' 

This the more passionate, and at the same time 
more temporary, character of 0vfi6<; {Ovfioi accord- 
ing to Jeremy Taylor, are "great but transient 
angers"), may explain a distinction of Xenophon, 
namely that 0vfi6<; in a horse is what opyi] is in a 
man {De He JEquest. ix. 2 ; cf. Plutarch, Cfryll. 4, 
in fine). Thus the Stoics, who dealt much in defi- 
nitions and distinctions, defined dvfio^ as opyif 
apxofjievrj (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 63. 114) ; and 
Ammonius : 0v/jl6^ fiev iari irpoa/caipo^* opytf Si 
iroXxrxpovLo^ fivqaiKaKia. Aristotle too, in his won- 

* It is commonly translated * furor ' in the Vulgate. Augustine 
(Enarr. in Fs. Izxxvii. 8) is dissatisfied with the application of this 
word to God, * furor ' being commonly attributed to thpse out of a 
sound mind, and proposes * indignatio ' in its rpom. 



180 SYNONYMS OF THE 

derful comparison of old age and youth, character- 
izes the angers of old men (Rhet ii. 11) : koX ol 
Ovfioly 6^€i<; fiiv elaiVy aaOeveis Se — like fire in straw, 
quickly blazing up, and as quickly extinguished. 
Origen {m P^. ii. 5, 0pp. vol. ii. p. 541) has a discus- 
sion on the words, and arrives at the same results : 
Sia<f>€p€t Be dvfjuyi opyrj^, r^ Ovfiov fikv elvat opyifp 
ava0vfjLi(OfJi€P7)v fcal eri, ifCKOiofiiprjv opyrfv S^ Spe^iv 
avrnifuopriaew^. This agrees with the Stoic defini- 
tion of opyriy that it is hriOvfiia rifimpia^. 

The irapopytaf^o^ of Eph. iv. 26, — a word which 
does not occur in classical Greek, but several times 
in the Septuagintj as at 1 Kin. xv. 30 ; 2 Kin. xix. 3, — 
is not = opy^y however we may translate it ' wrath.' 
This it cannot be ; for the wapopyuTfj^<; there is ab- 
solutely forbidden ; the sun shall not go down upon 
it; whereas under certain conditions opyi^ is a right- 
eous passion to entertain. The Scripture has nothing 
in common with the Stpics' absolute condemnation 
of anger ; it takes no such loveless view of other 
men's sins as his who said, creavrop fxr} rdpaa&e* 
afxaprdveL tk ; kavj^ afiaprdvei (Marc. Ant. iv. 46). 
It inculcates no dirddeia, but only a fierpuyrrddeta : 
and even as Aristotle {Ethic, Nic. vii. 7), in agree- 
ment with all deeper ethical writers, had aflSrmed 
before, that when guided by reason anger is a right 
affection, so the Scripture permits, and not only per- 
mits but when the right occasion for it has arrived. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 181 

demands it. This all the profounder teachers of the 
Church have allowed ; thus Gregory of Nyssa : 
ayaObv /aijvo^ iajcv 6 dvfJLo^y orav tov Xoytafiov vtto- 
^vyiov ryipfjrcu : Augustine {De Civ. Dei, ix. 5) : In 
disciplinll nostrS non tarn quseritur utrum plus ani- 
mus irascatur, sed quare irascatur. There is a 
" wrath of God," a wrath also of the merciful Son 
of Man (Mark iii. 5), and a wrath which righteous 
men not merely may, but as they are righteous, must 
feel ; nor can there be a surer and sadder token of an 
utterly prostrate moral condition than the not be- 
ing able to be angry with sin — and sinners ; see the 
words of Plato (Z^^. 731 5) : dvfioeiBfj fxev XPV 'trdina 
avSpa elvai, k. t. X.' St. Paul is not therefore, as so 
many understand him, condescending here to hu- 
man infirmity, and saying, "Your anger shall not 
be imputed to you as a sin, if you put it away be- 
fore nightfall " (see Suicer, Thes, s. v. o/oyij) ; but 
rather, " Be ye angry, yet in this anger of yours 
suflfer no sinful element to mingle ; " there is that 
which may cleave even to a righteous anger, the 
irapopyiaixo^^ the irritation, the exasperation ('exa- 
cerbatio'), which must be dismissed at once; that 
so, being defecated of this impurer element which 

' " ADger/* Bays Fuller {Holy State, iii 8), "is one of the sinews 
of the soul ; he that wants it hath a maimed mind, and with Jacob 
sine\^shrunk in the hollow of his thigh, must needs halt Nor ie 
it good to converse with such as cannot be angry.** 



182 SYNONYMS OF THE 

mingled with it, that only which ought to remain, 
may remain. 



§xxxviii. — ekaiovy fivpov (xp*®j oKeitfxa). 

It has been sometimes denied that in the Old 
Testament there is any distinction between these 
words ; and that on the very insufficient grounds 
that the Septuagint renders Tctfl sonietimes by fivpov 
(Prov. xxvii. 9 ; Cant. i. 3 ; Isa. xxxix. 2 ; Am. vi. 6) ; 
though much more frequently, indeed times out of 
number, by eXuiov. But how often in a single word 
of one language are latent two words of another ; 
especially, when that other abounds, as does the 
Greek compared with the Hebrew, in finer distinc- 
tions, in a more subtle notation of meanings ; for 
example, Trapoifiia and irapa^okrj in the Hebrew 
b^a, and this duplicity of meaning it is the part of 
a well-skilled translator to evoke. Nay the thing 
itself, the iivpov (= ' unguentum ') so naturally grew 
out of the eXaiov (= 'oleum'), having oil for its 
base, with only the superaddition of spice or scent 
or other aromatic ingredients, — Clement of Alexan- 
dria {Pcedag. ii. 8) calls it "adulterated oil" {SeSo- 
T^fiivov eKaiov^\ — that it would be long in any 

' Compare what Plutarch says of Lycurgus {Apoth, I-tiC 18): 
rh ix\v fjivpop €^(Ka(r€y, &s tov i\atov <pdoph.v koL 6\t0poy. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 183 

language before the necessity of differencing words 
would be felt. Thus in the Greek itself fivpov is 
not found earlier than Archilochus, who was the 
first to employ it (Athenseus, xv. 37). Doubtless 
there were ointments in Homer's time ; he is satis- 
fied however with 'sweet-smelling oil/ 'roseate oil' 
(eiwSe? eXawv^ Od. ii. 339 ; poSoev eXaiov, II, xxiii. 
186), wherewith to express them. 

But that in later times there was a clear distinc- 
tion between the two, and a distinction which ut- 
tered itself in language, is abundantly evident. I 
would only refer in proof to a passage in Xenophon 
{Conv. ii. 3, 4), which turns altogether on the greater 
suitableness of eXaiov for men ; and fivpov for wo- 
men ; these last consequently being better pleased 
that the men should savour of the manly oil than 
of the effeminate ointment {iXalov Se tov iv yvfiva- 
aloLS ocfif) Koi irapovaa fihioav fj fivpov yvvai^l, fcal 
airovtra wodeivoTepa). And in like manner our 
Lord's rebuke to the discourteous Pharisee, " Mv 
head with oil thou didst not anoint, but this woman 
hath anointed my feet with ointment " (Luke vii. 
46), would lose all or nearly all its point on any 
other supposition: *'Thou,withheldest from me," 
He would say, " cheap and ordinary civilities ; while 
she bestowed upon me costly and rare homages ; " 
where Grotius remarks well : Est enim jperpetua 
aimoTovxlO" Mulier ilia lacrimas impendit pedibus 



184 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Christi proluendis : Simon ne aquam quidem. Ula 
assidua est in pedibus Christi osculandis: Simon 
ne uno quidem oris osculo Christum accepit. Ula 
pretioso unguento non caput tantum sed et pedes 
perfimdit : ille ne caput quidem mero oleo : quod 
perfunctorise amicitise fuerat. 



Some have drawn a distinction between the 
verbs aXel^etv and xP^etv, which, as they make it 
dependent on this between fivpov and eKaiov, may 
deserve to be mentioned here. The ake'uf>uv, they 
say, is commonly the luxurious, or at any rate, the 
superfluous, anointing with ointment, 'xpUtv the 
sanitary anointing with oil. Thus Casaubon {ad 
Athenamrrhy xv. 18) : aK€l<f>€<r0ac dicebantur potissi- 
mum homines volicptatibics dediti^ qui pretiosis 
v/nguervtiB caput et manus illinebant; ^xpUaOai de 
hominibus ponebatur oleo corpus, samtatis cavssd^ 
inunguentibus. No traces of the observation of 
any such distinction appear in the New T^ptament; 
thus compare Mark vi. 13 ; Jam. v. 4, with Mark 
xvi. 1 ; John xi. 2. 

A distinction between the words is maintained 
there, but it is wholly different from this ; namely, 
that a\€i<f>€tv is the common and mundane, xpietv 
the sacred and heavenly, word : aK6i<f>€cv is used in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 185 

discriminately of all actual anointings, whether with 
oil or ointment ; while XP^ccv^ no doubt in its con- 
nexion with ;^Acrro9, is absolutely restricted to the 
anointing of the Son, by the Father, with the Holy 
Ghost, for the accomplishment of His great oflSce, 
being whDlly separated from all secular and com- 
mon uses. Thus, see Luke iv. 18 ; Acts iv. 27 ; x. 
38 ; 2 Cor. i. 21 ; Heb. i. 9 ; the only occasions on 
which XP^^^ occurs. The same holds good in the 
Septuagint, where XptW, x/owr/ia (cf. 1 John ii. 20, 
27), and xpteti/, are the constant and ever recurring 
words in respect of all religious and symbolical 
anointings ; a\€i<l>€cv hardly occurring in this sense, 
not oftener, I believe, than at Exod. xl. 13, and 
Numb. iii. 3. 



§ xxxix. — 'E/Spaio^y ^lovScuo^, ^la-parjXiTr}^. 

Atx these titles are used to designate members 
of the elect family, the chosen race ; yet they are 
very capable, as they are very well worthy, of be- 
ing discriminated. 

And first, 'E^palos — a name which dates back 
from a period before one, and very long before the 
other, of those brought into comparison with it, 
were, or cDuld have been, in existence (Josephus, 



186 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Antt. i. 6. 4). It is best derived from *ia?, the same 
word as xnrep^ 'super;' — in this title allusion being 
contained to Abraham's immigration into the land 
from the other side of Euphrates ; who was, there- 
fore, in the language of the Phoenician tribes among 
whom he came, " Abram the Hebrew^'^ or 6 irepdn]^, 
as it is well given in the Septuagint, Gen. xiv. 13, 
being from beyond {irepav) the river. Thus Origen, 
Jn Matt. tom. xi. 5 : 'E^paloc^ oUrtve^ epfjLfjpevovrcu 
irepaTLKoL The name is not one by which the chosen 
people know themselves, but by which others know 
them ; not one which they have taken, but which 
others have imposed on them; and we find the 
word's use through all the Old Testament entirely 
consistent with this explanation of its rise. In 
every case 'Efipalo^ is either a title by which for- 
eigners designate the people of God (Gen. xxxix. 
14, 17 ; xli. 12 ; Exod. i. 16, 19 ; 1 Sam. iv. 6 ; xiii. 
19 ; xxix. 3 ; Judith xii. 11) ; or by which they 
designate themselves to foreigners (Gen. xl. 15; 
Exod. ii. 7 ; iii. 18 ; v. 3 ; ix. 1 ; Jon. i. 19) ; or by 
which they speak of themselves in tacit opposi- 
tion to other nations (Gen. xliii. 32 ; Deut. xv. 12 ; 
1 Sam. xiii. 3 ; Jer, xxxiv. 9, 14) ; never, that is, be- 
ing used without such an antagonism, either latent 
or expressed. 

When, however, the name 'IovSai<yi arose, as it 
did in the later periods of Jewish history (the pre- 



NICW TESTAMENT. 187 

dse time will be presently considered), 'E^palo^ 
was no longer used exactly as hitherto it had been. 
Nothing is more frequent with words than to retire 
into narrower limits, occupying a part only of that 
meaning whereof once they occupied the whole ; 
when, through the coming up of some new term, 
they are no longer needed in all their former ex- 
tent ; and at the same time, through the unfolding 
of some new relation, it is no longer desirable that 
they should retain it. It was exactly thus with 
'E^pam. According to the usage of the word in 
the New Testament, the point of view external to 
the nation, which it once always implied, exists no 
longer ; neither is every Jew an 'Efipalo^ now ; but 
only those who, whether dwelling in Palestine or 
otherwise, have retained the sacred Hebrew tongue 
as their native language ; the true complement and 
antithesis to 'Efipalo<: being 'EX\i]vcaT7]<i, a word 
first occurring in the New Testament, and used to 
designate the Jew who has unlearned his own lan- 
guage, and now speaks Greek, and reads the Scrip- 
tures in the Septuagint version. 

This distinction first appears at Acts vi. 1 ; and is 
probably intended in the two other passages, though 
these are not without their difBculties, where 'E/3pai- 
09 occurs (2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Phil. iii. 15) ; as well as in 
the superscription, on whosesoever authority it rests, 
of the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is important to 



188 SYNONYMS OF THE 

keep in mind that in language, not in place of habi- 
tation, lay the point of diflFerence between the ' He- 
brew ' and the ' Hellenist.' He was a ' Hebrew,' 
wherever domiciled, who retained the use of the 
language of his fathers. Thus Paul, though settled 
in Tarsus, a Greek city in Asia Minor, can aflBlrm 
of himself that he was a 'Hebrew,' and of 'He- 
brew' parents (Phil. iii. 15), though it is certainly 
possible that he n^j mean by these assertions no 
more than in a general way to set an emphasis on 
his Judaism. Doubtless the greater number of the 
' Hebrews ' in this sense were resident in Palestine ; 
yet still it was not this fact, but their language 
wlbich constituted them such. 

At the same time it will be good to keep in mind, 
that this distinction and opposition of 'EfipaXo^ to 
'E\X7jviaT7]<;, as ^ distinction within the nation, and 
not of that nation with other nations, which is clear 
at Acts vi. 1, and probably is intended at Phil. iii. 
15 ; 2 Cor. xi. 22, is hardly, if at all, recognized by 
later Christian writers, not at all by Jewish and 
heathen. With them 'EjSpaio^ is simply equivalent 
to ^lovSaio^ : thus see Plutarch, Syrwp. iv. 6 ; Pau- 
sanias, v. Y. 3 ; x. 12. 5 ; while Eusebius, speaking 
of Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, who had been but 
once in his life at Jerusalem, and who wrote exclu- 
sively in Greek, expresses himself in this language 
(Hist. Eccl. ii. 4) : to fiev ovv yivo^ dvixaOev ^Efiptuo^ 



NEW TESTAMENT. 189 

^v: and Clement of Alexandria, as quoted by Euse- 
bius (vi. 14:), makes continually the antithesis to 
^E^patoty not 'EWrjviara^ but '^EXKrjve^ and edvrf. 
Theodoret {0pp. vol. ii. p. 1246) styles the Greek- 
writing historian, Josephus, <njyypa<f>ev<; ^EjSpcuo^ : 
cf. Origen, J^. ad Afric. 6. As little in Josephus 
himself, or in Philo, do any traces exist of the New 
Testament distinction between 'EWrjvKrrry; and 
'E^palo^, Only this much of it is recognised, that 
'E^palo^y though otherwise a much rarer word than 
*IovBalo<:y is always employed when it is intended to 
designate the people on the side of their language ; 
a rule which Jewish, heathen, and Christian writers 
alike consent to observe, and which still survives in 
the fact, that we speak to the present day of the 
Jewish nation, but of the Hebrew tongue. 

This name TouSaZby is of much later origin. It 
does not carry us back to the very cradle of the na- 
tion, and to the day when the father of the faithful 
passed over the river, and entered on the promised 
land ; but keeps rather a lasting record of the period 
of national disruption and decline. It arose, and 
could only have arisen, with the separation of the 
tribes. Then, inasmuch as the ten tribes, though 
with the worst right, assumed Israel as a title to 
themselves, the two drew their designation from the 
chiefest of them, and of Judah came the name 
D'nvT?, or TovSatot. Josephus, as far as I have ob- 



190 SYNONYMS OF THE 

served, never employs it in telling the earlier his- 
tory of his people. The first occasion of its use by 
him is, I believe, at Antt. x. 10. 1, and in reference 
to Daniel and his young companions. Here, how- 
ever, if his own account of the upcoming of the 
name were correct, he must have used it by antici- 
pation — his statement being that it first arose after 
the return from Babylon, and out of the fact that 
the earliest colony of those who returned were of 
that tribe {Antt, xi. 5. Y) : lKKr\6t]cav lie to opofia 
cf ^9 rjfiepa<; dvi^rja-av ifc Ba^vX&vo9, airb t^9 ^lovSa 
<f>v\r]^j ^ irpdiTrjs eKdovarj^ eh; €Keipov9 tov^ tottov^, 
ainroi re kclI 17 %o&/>a 7^9 irpoaTjyopias avrrj^ fiereKa- 
fiov. But in this he is clearly in error. We meet 
^lovSacoi in books anterior to the Captivity, used in 
them as a designation of those who pertained to the 
smaller section of the tribes, the kingdom of Judah 
(2 Kin. xvi. 6 ; Jer. xxxii. 12 ; xxxiv. 9 ; xxxviii. 
19) ; and not first in Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther ; 
however in these, and especially in the last, it may 
be of far more frequent occurrence. 

It is not hard to perceive how the name extend- 
ed to the whole nation. When the ten tribes were 
carried into Assyria, and disappeared from the 
world's stage, that smaller section which remained 
henceforth represented the whole nation ; and thus 
it was only natural that 'lovSalo^ should express, as 
it now came to do, not one of the kingdom of Judah 



NEW TESTAMENT. 191 

as distinguislied from that of Israel, but any member 
of the nation, a Jew in this wider sense, as opposed 
to a Gentile. In fact, the word ^IovSalo<; underwent 
a process exactly the reverse of that which ^E^palo^ 
had undergone. For 'E^pam^ belonging first to 
the whole nation, came afterwards to belong only 
to a part ; while 'loi/Sato?, designating at first only 
the member of a part, ended by designating the 
whole. It now, in its later, like 'E^palo^ in its ear- 
lier, stage of meaning, was a title with which the 
descendant of Abraham designated himself, when 
he would bring out the national distinction between 
himself and other people (Eom. ii. 9, 10) ; thus 
' Jew and Gentile ; ' never ^ Israelite and Gentile : ' 
or which others used about him, when they had in 
Adew this .same fact ; for example, the Eastern Wise 
Men inquire, " "Where is He that is born King of 
the JewsV (Matt. ii. 2), testifying by the form of 
this question, that they were themselves Gentiles, 
for they would certainly have asked for the King 
of Israel^ could they have claimed any nearer part 
or share in Him ; as, again, the Eoman soldiers and 
the Eoman governor give to Jesus the mocking title, 
"King of the Jews^^ (Matt, xxvii. 29, 37), but his 
own countrymen, the high priests, challenge Him 
to prove by coming down from the cross that He is 
" King of I^ad " (Matt, xxvii. 42). 

For indeed the absolute name, that which ex- 



192 SYNONYMS OF THE 

pressed the whole dignity and glory of a member 
of the theocratic nation, of the people in peculiar 
covenant with God, was ^la-parlkinf;^ It is a title 
of nnfrequent occurrence in the Septuagint, but 
often used by Josephus in his earlier history, as 
convertible with ^E^paio^ {Ardt, i. 9. 1, 2) ; in the 
middle period of it to designate a member of the 
ten tribes (viii. 8. 3 ; ix. 14. 1) ; and toward the end 
as equivalent to 'louSoZo? (xi. v. 4). It is only in its 
relation of likeness and difference to this last that 
we have to consider it here. It was the Jews' badge 
and title of honour. To be descendants of Abra- 
ham, this honour they must share with IshmaeUte, 
and Edomite ; but none except themselves were thjB 
seed of Jacob, such as in this name of Israelite they 
were declared to be : nor this only, but more hon- 
ourably still, their descent was herein traced up to 
him, not as he was Jacob, but as he was Israel, 
who as a Prince had had power with God and with 
men, and had prevailed (Gen. xxxii. 28). That tliis 
title was accounted the noblest, we have ample 
proof. Thus, when the ten tribes threw off their 
allegiance to the house of David, they claimed in 
their pride and pretension the name of " the king- 
dom of Israel " for the new kingdom which they 
set up — the kingdom, as the name was intended to 
imply, in which the line of the promises, the true 
succession of the early patriarchs, ran. So, too, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 193 

there is no nobler title with which our Lord can 
adorn Nathanael than that of " an Israelite indeed " 
(John i. 47), one in whom all which that name in- 
volved, might be indeed found. And when Peter, 
and again when Paul, would obtain a hearing from 
the men of their nation, when therefore they address 
them with the name most welcome to their ears, it 
is still avZpes ^laparjXlTac (Acts ii. 22 ; iii. 12 ; xiii. 
16 ; cf Eora. ix. 4 ; Phil. iii. 5 ; 2 Cor. xii. 29) ; 
with which they seek to acquire their good-will. 

When, then, we limit ourselves to the employ- 
ment in the New Testament of these three words, 
we may say that 'Efipcuo^ is a Hebrew-speaking, 
as contrasted with Greek-speaking, or Hellenizing, 
Jew ; what in our Yersion we have well called a 
' Grecian,' as distinguished from "E Wiyi/, a veritable 
' Greek ' or other Gentile ; ^lovSam is a Jew in his 
national distinction from a Gentile ; while 'lapa/qXl- 
T179, the augustest title of all, is a Jew as he is a 
member of the theocracy, and thus an heir of the 
promises. In the jSrst is predominantly noted his 
language, in the second his nationality (lovSaia-fio^^ 
Josephus, De Mace. 4 ; Gal. i. 13 ; ^lovSai^eiv^ Gal. 
ii. 14), in the third his religious privileges, and 
glorious vocation. 



194 8Y170NYMS OF THE 



§ xl. — alrio), ipoDToa). 

These words are often rendered by the authors 
of our Version, as though there was no diflference 
between them; nor can any fault be found with 
iheir rendering, in numerous instances, alreip and 
ipwT&p alike by our English * to ask.' Still it must 
be admitted that there are occasions on which they 
have a little marred the perspicuity of the original 
by not varying their word, where the original has 
varied its own. Thus it is, for example, at John 
xvi. 23, where the obliteration of the distinction 
between alrelv and ipwrav suggests very often a 
wrong interpretation of the verse, — as though its 
two clauses were in nearer connexion, and more 
direct antithesis, than in feet they are,— being in- 
deed in none. The words as they stand in our 
Version are as follows : "In that day ye ahaU ask 
me nothing \iiik ovk ipoDrrja-ere oiSh/]. Verily, 
verily, I say unto you. Whatsoever ye shaU ash 
[S<ra &p alTi]<Tf)T€] the Father in my name. He 
will give it you." Now any attentive student of 
the original will acknowledge, that "ye shall ask" 
of the first half of the verse has nothing to do with 
"ye shall ask" of the second; that in the first 
Christ is referring back to the iiOeKov avrop ipf^rw 



NEW TESTAMENT. 195 

of ver. 19 ; to the questions which they would fain 
have asked Him, but did not venture : " In that 
day," He would say, "the day of my seeing you 
again, I will by the Spirit so teach you all things, 
that ye shall be no longer perplexed, no longer 
wishing to ask Me questions, which yet you dare 
not put." Thus Lampe well : Nova est promissio 
de plenissimjt cognitionis luce, quS convenienter 
oeconomifiB Novi Testamenti coUustrandi essent. 
Nam sicut qusestio supponit inscitiam, ita qui nihil 
amplius quserit abunde se edoctum existimat, et in 
doctrinS plene expositS ac intellects acquiescit. 
There is not in the verse a contrast drawn between 
asking the Son, which shall cease, and asking the 
Father, which shall begin ; but the first half of the 
verse closes the declaration of one blessing, that 
they shall be so taught by the Spirit as to have 
nothing further to inquire ; the second half of the 
verse begins the declaration of altogether- a new 
blessing, that whatever they ask from the Father 
in the Son's name. He will give it them. Yet who 
will aflSrm that this is the impression which the 
English text conveys to his mind ? 

The distinction between the words is this : 
alriio^ the Latin 'peto,' is more submissive and 
suppliant, indeed the constant word by which is 
expressed the seeking of the inferior from the supe- 
rior (Acts xii. 20); of the beggar from him that 



190 SYNONYMS OF THE 

should give alms (Acts iii. 2) ; of the child from 
the parent (Matt. vii. 9 ; Luke xi. 11 ; Lam. iv. 4) ; 
of the subject from the ruler (Ezra viii. 22) ; of man 
from God (1 Kin. iii. 11 ; Matt. vii. 7 ; Jam. i. 5 ; 
1 John iii. 22 ; cf. Plato, Euthyph, 14 : evxeaOac 
[eaTLv] ahelv rois 6eov<;). ^E^ooTaa), on the other 
hand, is the Latin ' rogo ; ' or sometimes (as John 
xvi. 23; cf. Gen. xliv. 19) 'interrogo,' which in- 
deed is the only meaning that in classical Greek it 
has ; never there meaning ^ to ask,' but only ' to in 
terrogate,' or ' to inquire.' Like the Latin ' rogo,' ^ 
it implies on the part of the asker a certain equal- 
ity, as of king with king (Luke xiv. 32), or, if not 
equality, familiarity with him from whom the gift 
or favour is sought, which lends authority to the 
request. 

Thus it is very noticeable, and witnesses for the 
remarkable accuracy in the employment of words, 
and in the record of that employment, which pre- 
vails throughout the New Testament, that our Lord 
never uses ahelv or alreiaOau of Himself, in respect 
of that which He seeks from God ; his is not the 
petition of the creature to the Creator, but the re- 
quest of the Son to the Father. The consciousness 
of his equal dignity speaks out in this, that often as 

i Thus Cicero {Plane, x. 26) : Neque enim ego sic rogabam, ut 
petere viderer, quia familiaris esset meus. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 197 

He asks, or declares that He will ask, anything of 
the Father, it is always epwrw, ipG)Ti]<rQ)^ an asking, 
that is, as upon equal terms (John xiv. 16 ; xvi. 26 ; 
xvii. 9, 16, 20), never ako) or alrijaco,. Martha, on 
the contrary, plainly reveals her poor unworthy 
notions of his person, and in fact declares that she 
sees in Him no more than a prophet, ascribing the 
aheiadav to Him, which He never ascribes to Him- 
self: o<ra &p aiTi](Tf) rov Oebv, Sooaet aoL 6 QeQ<i 
(John xi. 22): on which verse Bengel has these 
observations: Jesus, de se roganteloquens iBei^ffrjv 
dicit (Luc. xxii. 32), et ipoDTrjaay, et nunquam alrov' 
fiai. Non Greece locuta est Martha, sed tamen 
Johannes exprimit improprium. ejus sermonem, 
quern Dominus benigne tulit : nam ahelaOac vide- 
tur verbum esse minus dignum; cf. his note on 
1 John V. 16. 

It will follow from what has been said that the 
ipcordp, being thus proper for Christ, inasmuch as 
it has authority in it, is not proper for us ; and in 
no single instance is it used in the New Testament 
to express the prayer of man to God,' of the creature 
to the Creator. The only passage where it might 
seem to be so used, which therefore might be ad- 
duced as contradicting this assertion, is 1 John v. 
16 ; which yet constitutes no true exception to the 
rule, but rather in its change from alrijaei of the 
earlier clause of the verse, a strong confirmation of 



198 SYNONYMS OF THE 

it " If any man see his brother sin a sin which is 
not unto death, he shall etak [atViyo-et], and He 
shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. 
There is a sin unto death. I do not say that he 
%haU pray ^Iva ipwrrja-jji] for it;" the Christian 
intercessor for his brethren, St. John declares, shall 
not assume the authority which would be impUed 
in making request for a sinner who had sinned the 
sin unto death (cf. Mark iii. 29 ; 1 Sam. xv. 35 ; 
xvi. 1), whatever this may be, that it might be for- 
given to him. 



§ xli. — avaTrava-L^y avea(^, 

OuB Version renders both these words by ^ rest ; ' 
dvairavo'c^ at Matt. xi. 28 ; xii. 45 ; and aveai^ at 
2 Cor. ii. 13 ; vii. 5 ; 2 Thess. i. Y. No one can 
object to this; while yet on examination we at 
once perceive that the words repose on diflferent 
images, and contemplate this ^rest' from diflferent 
points of view. ^Avdiravai^ (from avairavta) implies 
the pause or cessation from labour ; it is the con- 
stant word in the Septuagint for the rest of the Sab- 
bath ; thus Exod. xvi. 23 ; xxxi. 15 ; 3txxv. 2, and 
often : apcai^ (from avirnxC) implies the relaxing or 
letting down of chords or strings which have before 



NEW TESTAMENT. 199 

been strained or drawn tight, the exact and literal 
antithesis to it being hrlrcurt^ (from iirirelvw) : thus 
Plato {JPoL i. 349 e): iv r^ iirvrdfrei xal avia-ec t&p 
XopS&v : and Plutarch {De Lib. Ed. 18) : ra ro^a 
xal T^9 \vpa^ dvi€fi€Pj Xva hrncivai, Svmjd&fiev : and 
again {I/ye. 29): ovk aveai^ ^, aSX iirlrcuri,^ 7% 
iro7uT€ia<i. Other quotations illustrative of the 
word are the following ; this from Josephus {Antt. 
iii. 12. 3), where he says of Moses that in the jubi- 
lee year he gave aveaiv ry y^ airo re aporpov koI 
^vreiaf; : but the most instructive of all is in Plu- 
tarch's treatise, De Lib. Ed. 13: Soreoi/ oZv Tok 
waiolp ovaTTVoifp t&p avpe^&p ttopcoPj ivdvfiovfiipov^^ 
ore 'Jrd^ 6 /Stb? rffi&p ek aveaip fcal <rrrovhrpf Scffpr)' 
rai' teal SiA tovto ou jjlopop iypT^yoptn^;, aXXA xal 
iiTPO^ evpeOf)' ovSe TroXe/iov, aXKa koI elprjprj' ovBi 
j(€Cfia>p, aXkk Koi evSla' ovSk ipepyol Tr/jofet?, aXXi 
xal kopraL .... icaSoKov Sk ato^ercu, a&fia fxkPt 
ipSela xal wXrjpdxrec * '^vxv ^^j dpiaei teal iropfp^ 
The opposition betwee^ apeat^: and Girovhri which 
occurs in this quotation, is found also in Plato 
{Legg. iv. 724 a) ; while elsewhere in Plutarch 
{Symp. V. 6)5 av€cn^ is set over against arepo^topla^ 
as a dwelling at large, instead of in a narrow and 
strait room. 

When thus we present to ourselves the precise 
significance of apeai^, we cannot feil to note how 
excellently chosen the word is at Acts xxiv. 28/ 



200 SYNONYMS OF THE 

where exeti/ re avea-iv^ we translate, "and let him 
have Uberty.^^ It would be difficult to find a better 
word, yet ^liberty' does not exactly express St. 
Luke's intention : Felix, taking now a more favour- 
able view of Paul's case, commands the centurion 
who had him in charge, as the context abundantly 
shows, to relax for the fiiture the strictness of his 
imprisonment, and it is this exactly which aveat^ 
implies. 

The distinction, then, between it and avdirava(,<i 
is obvious. When our Lord promises avdiravcrt,^ to 
as many as labour and are heavy laden, if only 
they will come to Him (Matt. xi. 28, 29), the prom- 
ise is, that they shall cease from their toils ; that 
they shall no longer weary themselves for very 
vanity ; when his Apostle expresses his confidence 
that the Thessalonians, troubled now, should yet 
find aveai/s in the day of Christ (2 Thess. i. 7), that 
which he anticipates for them is not so much rest 
from labour, as a relaxmg of the strings of endur- 
ance, now so tightly drawn, and, as it were, strained 
to the uttermost. It is true that this promise aAi 
that are not at their centre two, but one ; yet for 
all this they present the blessedness which Christ 
will impart to his own under different aspects, and 
by help of different images ; and each word has 
its own peculiar fitness in the place where it is 
employed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 201 



§ xlii. — Ta'7r€ivo(f>poavvr}j tt/jooti;?. 

The very work for which Christ's Gospel came 
into the world was no other than to cast down the 
mighty from their seat, and to exalt the humble and 
meek ; it was then only in accordance with this its 
task and mission that it should dethrone the hea- 
then virtue fieyoKoy^irxJia^ and set up the despised 
Tair€ivo<l>po<Tvvrf in its room, stripping that of the 
honour which hitherto it had unjustly assumed, de- 
livering this from the dishonour which as unjustly 
had hitherto been its portion. Indeed the very 
word Ta7reivo<f>po(Tvvi] is, I believe, itself a birth of 
the Gospel ; I am not aware of any Greek writer 
who employed it before the Christian sera, or, Jipart 
from the influence of Christian writings, after. Plu- 
tarch has got as far as rairewo^prnv {De Alex. Virt 
ii. 4), which however he employs in an ill sense ; 
and the use which heathen writers make of raTreivo^, 
rairecvoTTj^y and other words of this family, shows 
plainly in what sense they would have employed 
Ta'nr€Lvo<f>pocrvvrj^ had they thought it good to allow 
the word. For indeed the instances in which to- 
TTeti/o? is used in any other than an evil sense, and 
to signify aught else than that which is low, slavish, 
and mean-spirited, are few and altogether excep- 
9* 



202 SYNONYMS OF THE 

tional. Thus it is joined with dveXevdepo^ (Plato, 
Zegg. iv. 744 c) ; with ayevvt]^ (Lucian, De Calum. 
24); with SouXt/^o?, and with other words of this 
stamp. 

Still these exceptional cases are more numerous 
than some will allow. Such may be found in Plato, 
Zegg, iv. 716 a, where raireLvo^ is linked with KCKoa- 
fi7)^evo^^ as in Demosthenes we have T^yoi fiirpiot 
Kol 'raireivol : and see. for its worthier use a very 
grand passage in Plutarch, De Prof . in Yirt 10. 
Combined with these prophetic intimations of the 
honour which should one day be rendered even to 
the very words which have to do with humility, it 
is very interesting to note that Aristotle himself has 
a vindication, and it only needs to receive its due 
extension to be a complete one, of the Christian 
Ta7r€cvo<f)poavpi] {Ethic, N'ic, iv. 3). Having con- 
fessed how hard it is for a man rg aXrfOeui fieyoKo- 
ylrv^ov elvm — for he will allow no fieydko^^vyia 
which does not rest on corresponding realities of 
goodness, and his fi€ya\a\}nj^o<: is one fieyoKoDv ainov 
d^ic!)Vj a^io<: civ — he goes on to observe, though 
merely by the way and little conscious how far his 
words reached, that to think humbly 'of oneself, 
where that humble estimate i^ the true one^ cannot 
be imputed to any as a culpable littleness of spirit ; 
it is rather the true <T<a<l>poa'vv7) (o yap fit/cp&p a^io^y 
Ka\ TovT(op a^i&v eavrbv, aaxjipoDv), But if this be BO 



NEW TESTAMEin:. 

(and who will" deny it?) then, seeing that for every 
man the humble estimate of himself is the true one, 
he has herein unconsciously vindicated the raireiwy- 
ffypoa-uvr) as a grace which should be every man's ; 
for that which Aristotle, even by the light of ethi- 
cal philosophy, confessed to be a ^aXcTroy, namely 
T$ aXfjdeia fjLeyaXoy^vxpv etvaij the Christian, con- 
vinced by the Spirit of God, knows to be an aivvor 
Tov. Such is the Christian Ta7reipo(f>poavinfy no self- 
made grace, and Chrysostom is in fact bringing in 
pride again under the disguise of humility, when 
he characterises it as a making of ourselves small, 
when we are great {Ta7r€ivo(f>poavinj tovto iartVj Srav 
Tw fiiya^ &Vy kavTov Tairetvol: and he repeats this 
often ; see Suicer, Thee. s. v.) ; it is rather the es- 
teeming of ourselves small, inasmuch as we are so ; 
the thinking truly, and because truly, therefore 
lowlily,, of ourselves. 

But it may be objected, if this be the Christian 
Ta7r€ivo(f>poa'VPr}, if it springs out of and rests on the 
sense and the confession of sin, how does this agree 
with the fact that our Lord could lay claim to this 
grace and say, " I am meek and lowly m heart '* 
{raTreipo^ rf) /capBiaj Matt. xi. 29) ? The answer is, 
that for the sirmer Ta7r€cvo<f>poavvr) involves the 
confession of sin, for it involves the. confession of 
his true condition ; while yet for the unfeUen crear 
ture the grace itself as truly exists, involving for 



204 SYNONYMS OF THE 

sucli the acknowledgmeat not of sinfulness, which 
would be untrue but of creatureliness, of absolute 
dependence, of having nothing, but receiving all 
things of God. Thus this grace belongs to the high- 
est angel before the throne, being as he is a crea- 
ture, yea even to the Lord of Glory Himself. In 
his human nature He must be the pattern of all 
humility, of all creaturely dependence; nor is it 
otherwise than as a man that Christ thus claims to 
be TaireLvo^ ; for it will be observed that He does 
not affirm Himself raireivo^ T<p irvevfiaTi (contrite 
sinners are such, Ps. xxiii. 19), any more than He 
could speak of Himself as tttw^^o? t^ nrvevfiaTLy his 
TTvevfia being divine; but He is Tair€ipb<; rfj xap- 
Sla: his earthly life was a constant living on the 
fulness of His Father's love ; He continually took 
the place which beseems the creature in the pres- 
ence of its Creator. 

I^et us seek now to put this word in its relation 
with irpaoTq^;, The Gospel of Christ did not to so 
great an extent rehabilitate irpaorri^ as it had done 
TaireLvo^poavvrj^ and this, because the word did not 
need rehabilitation in the same degree. UpaoTT)^ 
did not require to be turned from a bad sense to a 
good, but only to be lifted up from a lower good to 
a higher. This indeed it did need; for no one 
can read Aristotle's account of the irpSio^ and of 
irpaovq^ {Ethic. Nic, iv. 6), mentally comparing this 



NEW TESTAMENT. 205 

with the meaning which we attach to the words, 
and not feel that revelation has given to them a 
depth, a richness, a fulness of significance which 
they were very far from possessing before. The 
great moralist of Greece set the irpaoTq^ as the mid- 
dle virtue between the opyiXorrjf; and the dopyrjcruij 
with however so much leaning to this last that it 
might very easily run into this defect ; and he finds 
the irpaorri^ worthy of praise, more because by it a 
man retains his own equanimity and composure 
(the word is associated by Plutarch, De Frat Am, 
18, with fierpcoTrdffeia), than from any nobler reason. 
Neither does Plutarch's own pretty little essay, Ilepl 
dopyrjtriaf:, rise anywhere to a higher pitch than this, 
though we might perhaps have expected something 
higher from him. The word is opposed by Plato 
to dyptoTTj^ {Symp. 197 d) ; by Aristotle to x^^-^tto- 
Tr)<: {Hist. Anim. ix. 1) ; by Plutarch to airoTOfAia 
{De Lib. Ed. 18) ; all indications of a somewhat, su- 
perficial view of its meaning. 

Those Christian expositors who will not allow 
for the new- forces at work in sacred Greek, who 
would fain limit, for instance, the irpao^; of the New 
Testament to such a sense as the word, when em- 
ployed by the best classical writers, would have 
borne, will deprive themselves and those who accept 
their interpretation of very much of the deeper 
meaning in Scripture ; on which subject, and with 



206 SYNONYMS OF THE 

reference to this very word,'see some excellent ob- 
servations by F. Spanheim, Dvhia Evangelica^ vol. 
iii. p. 398. The Scriptural irpaoTrjfi is not in a man's 
outward behaviour only ; nor yet in his relations to 
his fellow-men ; as little in his mere natural dispo- 
sition. Eather is it an inwrought grace of the soul ; 
and the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards 
God (Matt. xi. 29 ; Jam. i. 21). It expresses that 
temper of spirit in which we accept his dealings 
with us without disputing and resisting ; arid it is 
closely linked with the Ta'7r€Lvo<f>poavvfj^ and follows 
close upon it (Eph. iv. 2 ; Col. iii. 12), because it is 
only the humble heart which is also the meek; and 
which, as such, does not fight against God, and 
more or less struggle and contend with Him. 

This meekness however, which is first a meek- 
ness in respect of God, is also such in the face of 
men, even of evil men, out of the thought that these, 
with the insults and injuries which they may inflict, 
are permitted and used by Him for the chastening 
and purifying of his people. This was the root of 
David's TrpaoT?;?, when on occasion of his flight 
from Absalom Shimei cursed and flung stones at 
him — the thought, namely, that the Lord had bid- 
den him (2 Sam. xvi. 11), that it was just for him to 
suffer these things, however unjust it might be for 
the other to inflict them ; and out of like convic- 
tions all true Christian irpaorq^ must spring. He 



NEW TESTAMENT. 207 

that is meek indeed will know himself a sinner 
among sinners ; or, if in one case He could not know 
Himself such, yet bearing a sinner's doom ; and 
this will teach him to endure meekly the provoca- 
tions with which they may provoke him, not to 
withdraw himself from the burdens which their sin 
may impose upon him (Gal. vi. 1 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25 ; 
Tit. iii. 2). 

The wpaoTrj^ then, if it is to be more than mere 
gentleness of manner, if it is to be the Christian 
grace of meekness of spirit, must rest on deeper 
foundations than its own, on those namely which 
the Tairei,vo<l>poa'vp7] has laid for it, and it can only 
continue, while it continues to rest on these. It is 
a grace in advance of Ta7reivo(f>poa'vvi]y not as being 
more precious than it, but as presupposing, and as 
unable to exist without it. 



§ xliii. — TTpooTiy?, eirieUeta. 

Ta7r€ivo(t>po(Tvin) and hneUeui are in their mean- 
ings too far apart to be fit objects of synonymous 
discrimination ; but TrpaoTfjf:^ which stands between 
them, holds on to them both. Its points of contact 
with the former have just been considered ; and for 
this purpose its own exact force was sought to be 



208 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Beized. Without going over this ground anew, we 
may now consider its relation to the latter. Of 
hneUeta^ it is not too much to say that the mere 
existence of such a word is itself a signal evidence of 
the high development of ethics among the Greeks? 
Derived from ef/cca, eoiKa^ * cedo/ it means properly 
that yieldingneas which recognises the impossibility 
which formal law will be in, of anticipating and 
providing for all those cases that will emerge and 
present themselves to it for their decision ; which, 
with this, recognises the danger that ever waits 
upon legal rights, lest they should be pushed into 
moral wrongs, lest the ' summum jus ' should prac- 
tically prove the 'summa injuria;' which therefore 
urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but going 
back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies 
and redresses the injustices of justice.' It is in this 
way more truly just than strict justice would have 
been ; Bucatov leaL jSeXriov nvo^ Sixaiovy as Aristotle 

' No Latin word ezactlj and adequately renders it; * dementia ' 
sets forth one side of it^ 'cequitas' another, and perhaps 'modestia' 
(by which the Vulgate translates it» 2 Cor. x. 1) a third; but the 
word is wanting which should set forth all these excellences re- 
conciled in a single and a higher one. 

* This aspect of iwieUtta must never be lost sight o£ Seneca 
(De Clem, il 7) weU brings it out: Nihil ex his facit, tanquam 
justo minus fecerit^ sed tanquam id quod constituit, justissiaium 
sit ; and Aquinas : Diminutiva est pcsnarum, secundum ratiiv^m 
rectam ; quando scilicet oportet^ et in quibus oportet 



NEW TESTAMENT. 209 

expresses it {Ethic. JSfic, v. 10. 6) ; being indeed, 
again to use his words, hravopdoDfia vo/jloVj t} iWel- 
7r€i Sid TO Ka06\ov : * and he sets the aKptPohUaio<i^ 
the man who stands up for the utmost tittle of his 
rights, over against the ivieiKT]^, Plato defines it 
{Def, 412 5), SiKaimv koX avfjL<f>€p6vTa)v ikdrrayai^. 

The archetype and pattern of this grace is to 
be found in God. All his goings back from the 
strictness of his rights as against men ; all his 
allowing of their imperfect righteousness, and giv- 
ing of a value to that which, rigidly estimated, 
would have none ; all his refusing to exact extreme 
penalties (Wisd. xii. 18 ; 2 Mace. x. 4 ; Ps. Ixxxv. 
5: oTi avy Kvpte, yprjaro^ Kol iTneixf}^ koc ttoXuI- 
X€09 : c£ Plutarch, Coriol. 24 ; Pericles, 39 ; Ccesar^ 
57); all his remembering whereof we are made, 
and measuring his dealing with us thereby; we 
may contemplate as iineUeuL upon his part ; as it 
demands the same, one toward another, upon ours. 
The greatly forgiven servant in the parable (Matt, 
xviii. 23) had known the e'TrmKeia of his lord and 

> Dftniel, a considerable poet, but a far greater thinker, has in . 
a poem addressed to Lord Chancellor Egerton a very noble passage, 
which may be regarded as an expansion of these words ; indeed it 
would not be too much to say that the whole poem is written in 
honour of imeiKua or * equity/ as being 

•* the soul of law, 
The life of justice, and the sptrit of right** 



210 SYNONYMS OF THE 

king ; tlie same therefore was justly expected from 
him. The word is often joined with <f>CKavdpcyiria 
(Polybius, V. 10. 1 ; Philo, De Vit. Mas. i. 36 ; 
2 Mace. ix. 27) ; with fuiKpodvfiia (Clemens Eom. 
1 Ep. 13) ; and, besides the passage in the New 
Testament (2 Cor. x. 1), often with tt/joott;? : as by 
Plutarch, Perides^ 39 ; Cma/r^ 57 ; cf. Pyrrh. 23 ; 
De Prof. Virt 9. 

The distinction existing between these two, 
iirieUeia and irpaorr}^^ Estius, on 2 Cor. x. 1, seizes 
in part, although he does not exhaust it, saying : 
Mansuetudo [Trpaoriy?] magis ad animum, hneUeia 
vero magis ad exteriorem conversationem pertinet ; 
cf. Bengel : irpaoTt}^ virtus magis absoluta, iTnei/ceia 
magis refertur ad alios. Aquinas too has a fine 
and subtle discussion on the relations of likeness 
and diflfererice between the graces which these 
words severally denote {Summ. Theolj 2" 2*, qu. 
167): Utrum Clementia et Mansuetudo sint peni- 
tus idem. Among other marks of difference he 
especially urges these two ; the first thatin hneuceia 
there is always the condescension of a superior to 
an inferior, while in TrpaoTtj^ nothing of the kind is 
necessarily implied: Clementia est lenitas supe- 
rioris ad versus inferiorem ; mansuetudo non solum 
est superioris ad inferiorem, sed cujuslibet ad quem- 
libet ; an3. the second, that which has been already 
brought fOTward, that the one grace is more pas- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 211 

sive, the otlier more active, or at least that the 
seat of the Trpaoriy? is in the inner spirit, while the 
emeUeia must needs embody itself in outward acts : 
Differunt ab invicem in quantum dementia est 
moderativa exterioris punitionis, mansuetudo pro- 
prie diminuit passionem irse. 



§ xliv. — KXhvTq^iy Xiyony?- 

KXiTTTTjs and Xiycm;? occur together John x. 1, 
8;^ cf Obad. 6; Plato, Pol i. 351 o; and their 
meanings coincide so far that the one and the other 
alike appropriate what is not theirs, but the KXerrrTf^ 
by fraud and in secret (Matt. xxiv. 43; John xii. 6 ; 
cf. Exod. xxii. 2 ; Jer. ii. 26) ; the \17crn79 by vio- 
lence and openly (2 Cor. xi. 26 ; cf. Ezek. xxii. 9 ; 
Jer. vii. 11 ; Plutarch, De Super. 3 : ov ^/Seirac 
\rjaTa<; 6 ol/covpcov) ; the one is the ^ thief and steals, 
the other the 'robber' and plunders, as his name, 
from Xrjtf: or Xeia (as our own ' robber,' from ' raub,' 
booty), suflSciently declares. They are severally 
the 'fur' and 'latro' of the Latin. Our translators 

* They do not constitute there a tautology or rhetorical ampli- 
fication ; but as Grotius well gives their several meanings : Fur 
[K\4irrns] quia venit ut rapiat alienum; latro [XtfirHis] quiaut 
occidat^ ver. 10. 



212 SYNONYMS OF THE 

have always rendered /cXeirrrj^ by Hhief ;' it would 
have been well, if they had with the same consist- 
ency rendered Xyari^ by * robber ; ' but, while they 
have done so in some places, in more they have 
not, rendering it also by * thief,' and thus effacing 
the distinction between the words. 

We cannot indeed charge them with any over- 
sight here, as we might those who at the present 
day should render \fi<m]^ by ' thief.' Passages out 
of number in our Elizabethian literature make it 
abundantly clear that there was in their day no 
such strong distinction between Hhief ' and * rob- 
ber ' as now exists. Thus Falstaff and his company, 
who with open violence rob the king's treasure on 
the king's highway, are ' thieves' throughout Shak- 
speare's H&n/ry IV. Still there are several places 
in our Version, where one cannot but regret that 
we do not read 'robbers' rather than 'thieves.' 
Thus Matt. xxi. 13: "My house shall be called 
the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of 
thieves y " so we read it ; but it is ' robbers ' and not 
'thieves' that have dens or caves. Again, Matt, 
xxvi. 55: "Are ye come out as against a thief 
with swords and staves for to take me?" — but it 
would be against some bold and violent robber 
that a party armed with swords and clubs would 
issue forth, not against a lurking thief. The poor 
traveller in the parable (Luke x. 30) fell not among 



NEW TESTAMENT. 213 

^thieves,' but among ^robbers;* bloody and vio- 
lent men, as by tlieir treatment of him they plainly 
declared. 

No passage however has suffered so seriously 
from this confounding of ' thief and ' rubber ' as 
the history of him, whom we are used to call ' the 
penitent tliief;' the anterior moral condition of 
whom is probably very much obscured for us, and 
set to a great extent in a wrong light, by the asso- 
ciations which naturally accompany this name. It 
is true that in St. Luke's account of the two that 
are crucified with Jesus, the one obdurate, the other 
penitent, the word Xj/cmfv does not occur any more 
than KkeTrrrjf: : they are styled generally xaKovpyoiy 
^ malefactors ; ' and only from the earlier Evangel- 
ists their more special designation as Xrforai has 
been drawn. In all probability they both belonged 
to the band of Barabbas, who for murder and in- 
surrection had been cast with his fellow insurgents 
into prison (Mark xv. 7). He too was a Xyarr^ 
(John xviii. 40), and yet no common malefactor, on 
the contrary *a notable prisoner' {hiafiio^; iirlaijfjLo^j 
Matt, xxvii. 16). Now when we consider the en- 
thusiasm of the Jewish populace on his behalf, and 
combine this with the fact that he had been cast 
into prison for an unsuccessful insurrection, keep- 
ing in mind too the condition of the Jews at thia 
period, with false Christs, false deliverers, every 



214 SYNONYMS OF THE 

day starting up, we can hardly doubt that Barab- 
bas was one of those stormy zealots, who were ever- 
more raising anew the standard of resistance against 
the Eoman domination ; flattering and feeding the 
insane hopes of their countrymen, that they should 
yet break the Eoman yoke jfrom off their necks. 
These men, when hard pressed, would betake them- 
selves to the mountains, and there live by plunder, 
— ^if possible, by that of their enemies, if not, by 
that of any within their reach. The history of 
Dolcino's * Apostolicals,' of the Camisards in the 
Cevennes, makes sufficiently clear the downward 
progress by which they would not merely obtain, 
but deserve to obtain, the name of * robbers.' By 
the Komans they would naturally be called and 
dealt with as such ; nay, in that great perversion 
of all moral sentiment which would find place at 
such a period as this was, the name, like 'klept' 
among the modem Greeks, would probably cease 
to be dishonorable, would scarcely be refused by 
themselves. 

Yet of how different a stamp and character 
would many of these men, these last protesters 
against a foreign domination, be likely tp be fi'om 
the mean and cowardly purloiner, whom we call 
the thief. The bands of these Xjytrra/, while ihey 
would number in their ranks some of the worst, 
would probably include also some that were ori- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 216 

ginally of the noblest spirits, of the nation — even 
though they h]ad miserably mistaken the moral 
necessities of their time, and had sought to work 
out by the wrath of man the righteousness of God. 
Such a one we may well imagine this penitent 
Xi7<7Ti79 to have been. Should there be any truth 
in such a view of his former condition, — and cer- 
tainly it would go far to explain his sudden conver- 
sion, — ^it is altogether kept out of sight by the name 

* thief which we have given him; and whether 
there be any truth in it or not, there can be no 
doubt that he would be more accurately called, 

* the penitent roVber^ 



§ xlv. — 7r\vva)y rtWo), Xovoo, 

Wb have but the one English word, ' to wash,' 
with which to render these three Greek. We must 
needs confess here to a certain poverty, seeing that 
the three have severally a propriety of their own, 
— one which the writers of the New Testament 
always observe, — and could not be promiscuously 
and interchangeably used. Thus ifKvveiv is always 
to wash inanimate tkhnga^ as distinguished from 
living objects or persons ; garments most frequently 
{eJfiara, Homer, 11. xxii. 166 ; i/taTtoi/, Plato, 



216 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Charm. 161 e ; and in the Septuagint continually;, 
so <rroXa9j Kev. vii. 4) ; but not exclusively these, 
which some have erroneously asserted, as witness 
the only other occasion where the word occurs in 
the New Testament, being there employed to sig- 
nify the washing or cleansing of TieU {Bifcrvaj Luke 
V. 2). When the Psalmist exclaims, ttXvpop fie 
airo tt}? dpofMia<i (Ps. 1. [li.] 3 ; cf. ver. 9), these 
words must not be cited in disproof of this asser- 
tion that only of things, and not of persons, irkvvew 
is used ; for the allusion to the hyssop which fol- 
lows presently after, shows plainly that David had 
the ceremonial aspersions of the Levitical law pri- 
marily in his eye, which aspersions would find 
place upon the garments of the unclean person 
(Lev. xiv. 19 ; Numb. xix. 6), however he may have 
looked through these to another and better sprink- 
ling beyond. 

NliTTeLv and XoiJeti/, on the other hand, express 
the washing of living persons ; although with this 
difference, that viirreiv (which displaced in the later 
period of the language the Attic i/tfeti/) and i/t-^a- 
adaL almost always express the washing of a fwrt 
of the body, — ^the hands (Mark vii. 3), the feet 
(John xiii. 5 ; Plutarch, Thes. 10), the face (Matt, vi, 
17), the eyes (John ix. 7), the back and shoulders 
(Homer, Od. vi. 224) ; while Xowtv, which is not so 
much *to wash' as 'to bathe,^ and Xovo^ot, or in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 217 

common Greek \ov€<t0(Uj *to bathe oneself,' imply- 
always, not the bathing of a part of tlie body, but 
of the whole : XeTiovfiipot to <r&fui, Heb. x. 23 ; cf. 
Acts ix. 37 ; 2 Pet. ii. 22 ; Kev. i. 6 ; Plato, Phced. 
115 a. This limitation of viirreiv to persons as 
contradistinguished from things, which is always 
observed in the New Testament, is not without 
exceptions, although they are very unfrequent, 
elsewhere ; thus, in Homer 11. xvi. 229, Berra^ : 
Od. i. 112, rpatri^'i : Lev. xv. 12, tncevo^:. A sin- 
gle verse in the Septuagint (Lev. xv. 11) gives us 
all the three words, and all used in their exact pro- 
priety of meaning : /cal oo-tov iiiv aylrfjTcu 6 yovop- 
pvii^ Koi tA? X^^P^ ^^ vevvirrai, i^Ti,^ irXvvel 
rh ificLTia^ teal Xovaerai, to a-Afui vSari. 

The passage where it is most important to mark 
the distinction between the last considered words, 
the one signifying the washing of a part, and the 
other the washing of the whole, of the body, and 
where certainly our English version loses some- 
thing in clearness from not possessing words which 
should note the change that finds place in the origi- 
nal, is John xiii. 10 : ^' Se that is washed [o XeXo v- 
fi»€vo^'\ needeth not save ^ too^A [yl'^aaOui^ his 
feet, but is clean every whit" * The foot-washing 

' The Latin laboqn under the same defect ; thus in the Vulgate 
it stands : Qui loiH% est^ non indiget nisi ut pedes kmt, De Wette 
10 



218 SYNONYMS O? THB 

was a symbolic act. St. Peter had not perceived 
this at the first, and, not perceiving it, had ex- 
claimed, " Thou shalt never wash my feet." But 
so soon as ever the true meaning of what his Lord 
was doing flashed upon him, he who had before 
refused to suffer Him to wash even his feet, now 
asked to be washed altogether : " Lord, not my feet 
only, but also my hands and my head." Christ re- 
plies, that it needed not this ; Peter had been al- 
ready made partaker of the great washing, of that 
forgiveness which reached to the whole man ; he 
was \eXot;/tei/o9, and this great absolving act did not 
need to be repeated, as, indeed, it was not capable 
of repetition: "Now ye are clean through the word 
which I have spoken unto you " (John xv. 3). !But 
while it was thus with him, he did need at the same 
time to wash his feet {yii^aadav rov^ w6iBaf;\ ever- 
more to cleanse himself, which could only be 
through suffering his Lord to cleanse him from the 
defilements which even he, a justified, and in part 
also a sanctified man, should gather as he moved 
through a sinful world. The whole mystery of our 
justification, which is once for all, reaching to every 
need, embracing our whole being, and our sanctifi- 
cation, which must daily go fcKrward, is wrapped 



liM sought to presenre th« Tariation of word : Wer gthtM ist^ der 
bnraeht doh nioht ab an den FQsmh sv woBchm. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 210 

up in the antiiheBis between the two words. This 
Angustine has expressed clearly and well {In Ev. 
Joh. xiii. 10) : Homo in sancto quidem baptismo 
totns ablnitur, non prseter pedes, sed totus omnino: 
veruntamen cnm in rebus humanis postea vivitur, 
ntique terra calcatur. Ipsi igitur humani affectus, 
sine qnibns in hSc mortalitate non vivitur, quasi 

pedes sunt, ubi ex humanis rebus afficimur 

Quotidie ergo pedes lavat nobis, qui interpellat pro 
nobis : et quotidie nos opus habere ut pedes lave- 
mus in ipsfi Oratione Dominicfi confitemur, cum 
didmus, Dimitte nobis debita nostra. 



% xlvi. — ^w, ^7709, ^anip, Xi{;^09, \afiwd<:. 

Atx these words are rendered either occasion- 
ally or always, in our version, by * light ;^ thus 
^w, Matt. iv. 16 ; Eom. xiii. 12 ; and often ; ^€7- 
709, Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Mark xiii. 24 ; Luke xi. 33, 
being the only three occasions upon which the word 
occurs ; ^cwrn;/^, Phil. ii. 15 ; Kev. xxi. 11, the only 
two occasions of its occun-ence ; XiJ^wy, Matt. vi. 
22 ; John v. 33 ; 2 Pet. i. 19, and elsewhere ; though 
also often by ^ candle,' as at Matt v. 15 ; Bev. xxii. 
6 ; and Xa/m-d^y Acts xx. 8, but elsewhere by 4amp,'. 



220 8TN0imiS OF THE 

as at Matt. xxv. 1 ; Eev. viii. 10 ; and by * torch,' 
as at John xviii. 3. 

Hesychius and the old grammarians distingnish 
between ^? and ^€7709 (which were originally 
one and the same word), that <l>m is the light of the 
sun or of the day, ^€7709 the light or lustre of the 
moon. Any such distinction is very far from being 
constantly maintained even by the Attic writers 
themselves, to whom it is said more peculiarly to 
belong ; thus in Sophocles alone ^67709 is three or 
four times applied to the sun {AfiMg. 800 ; Ajaa, 
654, 840 ; TracJdn. 597) ; while in Plato we meet 
^w freKrivTf; {Pol. vii. 516 h ; cf. Isa. xiii. 10 ; £zek. 
xxxii. 7). Still there is truth in that which the 
grammarians have observed, that ^€7709 is predomi- 
nantly applied to the light of the moon or other 
luminaries of the night (Plato, Pol. vi. 508 c), ^w 
to that of the sun or of the day. Nor is it unwor- 
thy of note that this, like so many other finer dis- 
tinctions of the Greek language, is thus &r observed 
in the New Testament, that on the only occasions 
when the light of the moon is mentioned, ^€7709 is 
the word employed (Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Mark xiii. 24 ; 
cf Joel ii. 10 ; iii. 15), as 4>w where that of the sun 
(Eev. xxii. 5). From what has been said it will 
follow that ^0)9 and not ^67709, is the true antithe- 
sis to o-«Jto9 (Plato, Pol. vii. 618 a; Matt vi. 28 ; 
1 Pet. ii. 9) ; and generally that the former will be 



NEW TESTAMENT. 221 

the more absolute word ; thus Hab. iii. 4, koX <^6y- 
♦yo9 airrov \rov Qeov] &^ (f>&^ earai. (See Doder- 
lein, Zdt, Sh/non. vol. ii. p. 69). 

toxmjpy it has been already observed, is ren- 
dered ' light ' in our version, on the two occasions 
upon which it occurs. The first of these is Phil, 
ii. 15 : " Among whom ye shine as Ughts in the 
world ^' {(a>^ SoxrTrjpe^ iv Koafitp). It would be 
difficult to improve on this rendering, while yet it 
fails to mark with all ike precision which one would 
desire the exact simiUtude which the Apostle in- 
tends. The <f>oi><rrrjp€9 here are undoubtedly the 
heavenly bodies, {' luminaria,' as the Yulgate has 
it well, * Himmelslichter,' as De Wette), and mainly 
the sun and moon, the lights,' or * great lights^ 
(— < luces,' Cicero, poet.), of which Moses speaks, 
Gen. i. 14, 16 ; at which place the Septuagint has 
ifxooTTjpe^ for the Hebrew ninko. Cf. Ecclus. xliii. 
T, where the moon is called ffxoarijp : and Wisd. 
xiii. 2, where tfxoaTrjpe: ovpapovis exactly equiva- 
lent to 4x0<rrrjp€^ iv Koafi^ at Phil. ii. 16 ; which 
last is to be taken as one phrase, the Koajio^ being 
the material world, the arepiofia or firmament, not 
the ethical world, which has been already expressed 
by the yeveh CKokiii kclL Bi€<rrpafifi€vrf. 

So also, on the second occasion of the word's 
appearing, Eev. xxi. 11, where we have translated, 
" Ser Uffht [6 ifnoar^p avTijsi] was like imto a stone 



222 SYNONTlCft OF THE 

most precious,*' it would not be easy to propose 
anything better; and the authors of our version 
certainly did well in going back to this, Wiclif s 
translation, and in displacing " her ahmmg^^^ which 
has found place in the intermediate versions, and 
which rrmst have conveyed a wrong impression to 
the English reader. Still, "her light" is not quite 
satisfactory, being not wholly unwnbiguous. It, 
too, may present itself to the English reader as, the 
light which the Heavenly City diflSised ; when, in- 
deed, fl>(o<m]p means, that which diffused light to 
the Heavenly City, its luminary, or light-giver. 
What this light-giver was, we learn from ver. 28 : 
**the Lamb is the light thereof;" o \v)(yo9 avrrj^ 
there being -*= o fjxuxrrrfp airrj^ here. 

In respect of XiJ^o? and Xa/A7ra?, it may very 
well be a question whether the actual disposition 
made by our translators of the words which they 
had at their command was the best which could have 
been adopted. K instead of translating TuLfiwd^ 
' torch ' on a single occasion (John xviii. 8), they 
had always done so, this would have left * lamp,' 
now appropriated by Xafiwd^;, disengaged. Alto- 
gether dismissing * candle,' they might have ren- 
dered Xvxifo^ by ' lamp,' in all, or certainly very 
nearly all, the passages where it occurs. At present 
there are so many occasions where ' candle ' would 
manifestly be inappropriate, and where, therefore, 



NEW TBSTAKKNT. 

thej are obliged to fall back on ^ ligfaV that the 
didtinctioii between ^w and 7sm)(vo9 nearly, if not 
quite, disappears in onr version. 

The advantages of such a re-arrangement of the 
words appear to me not inconsiderable. In the first 
place, the English words would more nearly repre- 
.sent the Greek originals: Xv^i^? is not a candle 
(* candela,' from ' candeo,' the white wax light, and 
then any Mnd of taper), but a hand-lamp fed with 
oil ; while Xa/^Tra? is not a lamp at all, but a torch, 
and this not merely in the purer times of the lan- 
guage, but also in the later Hellenistic Greek as 
well (Polybius, iiij. 93. 4 ; Herodian, iv. 2 ; Judg. 
vii. 16, 20) ; and so, I believe, always in the New 
Testament. In proof that at Eev. viii. 10, Xafiird^ 
should be translated * torch,' Q Fackel,' De Wette,) 
gee Aristotle, De Mund. 4. And even in the para- 
ble of the Ten Virgins it would be better so. It 
may be urged, indeed, that there the XafxirdSe: are 
nourished with oil, and must needs therefore be 
lamps. A quotation, however, from Elphinstone 
{History of India^ vol. i. p. 338), will show that in 
the East the torch, as well as the lamp, is fed in 
this manner. He says : " The true Hindu way of- 
lighting up is by torches held by men, who feed 
the flame with oil from a sort of bottle " [the 07- 
yelov of Matt. XXV. 4] " constructed for the pur- 
pose." 



224 SYNONYHB OF TEffi 

It would not be difficnlt to indicate more pas- 
sages than one, which would be gainers in perspicu- 
ity by such a rearrangement as has been proposed, 
especially by marking more clearly, wherever this 
were possible, the difference between ^ok and Xt;- 
Xyo^- Thus 2 Pet. i. 19 is one of these ; but still 
more so John v. 35. We there make our Lord to 
say of the Baptist, " He was a burning and a shin- 
ing Ught^^ — the words of the original bfeing, ixeivo^ 
ffif 6 \(t)(ya^ 6 ictuofieva^ xai, tfyaivtov. The Vulgate 
has rendered them better : Hie erat lucema ardens 
et lucens ; not obliterating, as we have done, the 
whole antithesis between Christ, the ^9 aK7i6iv6v 
(John i. 8), the ^9 ex ^769, the Eternal Lights 
which, as it was never kindled, so should never be 
quenched, and the Baptist, a larrvp kindled by the 
hands of Another, in whose light men might for a 
season rejoice, and which was then extinguished 
again. It is not too much to say, that in the use 
of Xi5^o9 here and at 1 Pet, i. 19, being here tacitly 
contrasted with <^639, and there openly with <^fi><r^ 
/W)9, the same opposition is intended, only now 
transferred to the highest sphere of the spiritual 
world, which the poet had in his mind when he 
wrote, — 

'* Night's candles are burnt out^ and joound Day 
Stands tiptoe on the misty mountain tops." 



NEW TESTAMENT. 225 



§ xlvii. — x^P*^^ €\eo<:. 

Of xapt9 we have the following definition (Aris- 
totle, Hhet. ii. 7) ; ear a S^ xapi^ Kod^ fjv 6 2^^^ 
X^erai x^P^^ inrovpyeiv r^ ieojMhfpy fiff ami rcvo^iy 
fi/qi* Tva rt airr^ r^ virovpyovinv^ oKK* Xva ixelvq) ri. 
The word^is often fonnd associated with SXeo^ 
(1 Tim. i. 2; 2 Tim. i. 2; Tit i. 4; 2 John 3); it is 
in this association only, and as signifying the Di/o-me 
compassion, that I wish to speak of it here. But 
though standing in closest inner as well as outer 
connexion, there is this difference between them, 
that xa/o/9 has reference to the sins of men, eXco? to 
their misefy, God's x^P^i ^^^ fr^® grace and gift, 
is extended to men, as they are guilty, his IXeo? ifl 
extended to them as they are miserable.* The 
lower creation may be, and is, the object of God's 
iKj&Qf;^ inasmuch as the burden of man's curse has 
redounded also upon it (Job xxxviii. 41 ; Ps. clxvii. 
9 ; Jonah iv. 11), but of liis ^a/j*? man alone ; he 
only needs, he only is capable of receiving it. In 

* It will be seen that the Stoic definition of ^\eot, to wit, \{nrn 
m% htX iata^lws KOKOfodovm (Diogenes Laertins, yii 1. 68 ; cfl Aris- 
totle^ Jihet. ii. 8), breaks down at two points when transferred tc 
the Divine compassion, which has not grief in it, and is very far 
from being limited to those who suflfer unioorthily» 
10* 



226 SYlfONYMB OF THE 

the Divine mind, and in the order of our salvation 
as conceived therein, the eXeo^ precedes the x^pt9. 
God so loved the world with a pitying love (herein 
was the ekeo^) that He gave his only-begotten Son 
(herein the x^pt?) that the world through Him 
might be saved : cf. Eph. ii. 4. ; Luke i. 78, 79. But 
in the order of the manifestation of God's purposes 
of salvation the grace must go before the mercy, the 
;^a/)^9 must make way for the e\€09. It is true that 
the same persons are the subjects of both, being at 
once the guilty and the miserable ; yet the right- 
eousness of God, which it is just as necessary should 
be maintained as his love, demands that the guilt 
should be done away before the misery can be as- 
suaged ; only the forgiven can, or indeed may, be 
made happy ; whom He has pardoned. He heals ; 
men are justified before they are sanctified. Thus 
in each of the apostolic salutations it is first xdpv;^ 
and then eXeo?, which the Apostle desires for the 
faithful (Rom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. i. 2 ; GW. i. 
3 ; Eph. i. 2 ; Phil. i. 2, &c.) ; nor could the order 
of the words be reversed. 



NEW TE8TA1IERT. 327 



§ xlviii. — deocepr^'i^ evaejSii^y eifXafiii^, OpTJa-KO^^ 
Set^iSaifMOP, 

0€o<rel3ij^y an epithet three times applied to Job 
(i. 1, 8.; ii. 8), occurs only once in the New Testa- 
ment (John ix. 31) ; and Beoaifiem no oftener (1 Tim« 
iL 10). Evaefiij^y with the words related to it, is of 
more frequent occurrence (1 Tim. ii. 2 ; Acts x. 2 ; 
2 Pet ii. 9, and often). Before we proceed to con- 
sider the relation of these to the other words of this 
group, a subordinate distinction between them- 
selves, may fitly be noted; this, namely, that in 
Oeotre^i]^ is necessarily implied by its very derivar 
tion, piety toward Oody or toward the gods; while 
eifo-efii^y often as it means this, yet also may mean 
piety in the fulfilment of human relations, as toward 
parents or others (Euripides, JSlect. 253, 254), the 
word according to its etymology only implying 
* worship ^ (in our older use of the word) and rever- 
ence well and rightly directed. It has in fact the 
same double meaning as the Latin ^ pietas,' which 
is not merely ^justitia adversum Deos^ (Cicero, De 
JVat. Deor. i. 41) ; a double meaning, which, deeply 
instructive as it is, yet proves occasionally embar- 
rassing in respect of both one word and the other ; 
sa that on several occasions Augustine, when he hfts 



228 SYNONYMS OF THE 

need of an accurate nomenclature, and is u^g 
* pietas,' pauses to observe that lie means by it what 
evaifieta indeed may mean, but Oeoai^eia alone must 
mean, namely^ piety towa/rd God {De Civ. Ddj x. 1 ; 
Enchir. 1). At the same time evaifieuij which the 
Stoics defined hria-rfjfirf de&v depaireUv; (Diogenes 
Laertius, vii. 1. 64, 119), and which was not every 
reverencing of the gods, but a reve^rencing of them 
aright (eu), is the standing word to express thift 
piety, both in itself (Xenophon, Ages. iii. 5 ; xi. 1), 
and as it is the true mean between aJdeoTvjs and Sc*- 
aiSaifiovla (Plutarch, I>e Sfwperst, 14). 

What might otherwise have required to be said 
on evKa^Tj^ has been alrekdy anticipated in part in, 
considering the word cvXdjSeia (see p. 58); yet 
something further may be added here. It was 
there observed how the word passed over from sig- 
nifying caution and carefiilness in respect of human 
things to the same in respect of divine ; the Ger- 
man 'Andacht' had very much the same history 
(see Grimm, Worterhtcehy s. v.). The only three 
places in the New Testament in which evXafiij^ oc- 
curs are these, Luke ii. 25 ; Acts ii. 5 ; viii. 2. We 
have uniformly translated it ' devout ; ' nor could 
any better equivalent be offered for it. It will be 
observed that on all these occasions it is used to ex- 
press Jewish, and, as one might say. Old Testament 
piety. On the first it is applied to Simeon {BUau)^ 



NEW TESTAMENT. 

/col €v\a/3iJ9)i on the second, to those Jews who 
came from distant parts to keep the commanded 
feasts at Jerusalem; and on the third there can 
scarcely be a doubt that the apBpe^ €vkaff€i<: who 
carry Stephen to his burial, are not, as might at 
first sight appear, Chriaticm brethren ; but devout 
Jews, who showed by this courageous act of theirs, 
as by their great lamentation over the slaughtered 
saint, that they abhorred this deed of blood, that 
they separated themselves in spirit from it, and 
thus, if it might be, from all the judgments which 
it would bring down on the city of those murderers. 
Whether it was also further given them to believe 
on the Crucified, who had such witnesses as Ste- 
phen, we are not told ; we may well presume that 
it was. 

K we keep in mind that in that mingled fear 
and love which together constitute the piety of man 
toward God, the Old Testament placed its empha- 
sis on the fear, the New places it on the love, though 
there was love in the fear of God's saints then, and 
there must be fear in their love now, it will at once 
be evident how fitly evXa^^J? was chosen to set forth 
their piety under the Old Covenant, who like Zach- 
arias and Elisabeth " were righteous before God, 
walking in all the commandments and ordinances 
of the Lord blameless," (Luke i. 6), and leaving 
nothing willingly undone which pertained to the 



230 STNONTMS OF THE 

circle of their prescribed duties. For this sense of 
accurately and scrupulously performing liiat which 
is prescribed, with the consciousness of the danger 
of slipping into a careless negligent performance 
of God's service, and of the need therefore of anx- 
iously watching against the adding to or diminish- 
ing from, or in any other way altering, that which 
is commanded, lies ever in the words evXa^Si;?, €v\dr 
fieui, when used in their religious significance.' 

Plutarch, in more than one very instructive 
passage, exalts the evkdfieui of the old Eomans in 
divine matters as contrasted with the comparative 
carelessness of the Greeks. Thus in his Ooriola/mi$ 
(c. 25), after other instances in proof, he goes on to 
say : " Of late times also they did renew and begin 
a sacrifice thirty times one after another; because 
they thought still there fell out one fault or other 
in the same ; so holy and devout were they to the 
gods" {roiavTrj /j,€V evXdfieva irpb^ ro Oeiov *Pa>- 
fiaimv).^ Elsewhere, he pourtrays JEmilius Paulus 
(c. 3) as eminent for his evkd^eui. The passage is 

' Cicero's well-knowu words deducing * religio * from * relegere * 
may be here fitly quoted {De Nat. Beor, ii. 28) : Qui omnia qu« 
ad cultum deorum pertinerent, diligenter retractarent^ et tanquam 
reUgerent, sunt dicti religiosi.. 

• North's Plutarch, p. 196. Cf. Aulus GteUius, il 28 : Veteres 
Romani .... in constituendis religionibus atque in diis immortali- 
bus animadvertendis eastissimi.cautissimiqtle. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 231 

long, and I will only quote a portion of it, availing 
myself again of old Sir Thomas North's translation, 
which, thongh somewhat loose, is in essentials cor- 
rect: "When he did anything belonging to his 
office of priesthood, he did it with great experience, 
judgment and diligence ; leaving all other thoughts, 
and without omitting any ancient ceremony, or 
adding to any new ; contending oftentimes with his 
companions in things which seemed light and of 
small moment ; declaring to them that though we 
do presume the gods are easy to be pacified, and 
that they readily pardon all faults and sc^-pes com- 
mitted by negligence, yet if it were no more but 
for respect of the commonwealth's sake they should 
not slightly or carelessly dissemble olr pass over 
faults committed in those matters " (p. 206). 

But if in eifKa^rfi we have the anxious and the 
scrupulous worshipper, who makes a conscience of 
changing anything, of omitting anything, being 
above all tilings fearful to offend, we have in dprja^ 
Ko^^ which still more nearly corresponds to the Latin 
* religiosus,' the zealous and diligent performer of 
the divine offices, of the outward service of God. 
Opfja-zcela (— *cultus,' or perhaps more strictly, 
'cultus exterior'), is predominantly the ceremonial 
service of religion, the external forms or body, of 
which eva-i^ut is the informing soul. The sugges- 
tion that the word is derived firom Orpheus the 



SYNONYMS OF THE 

Th/rada/n^ who brought in the celebration of re- 
ligious mysteries, etymologically worthless, yet 
points, and no doubt truly, to the celebration of 
divine offices as the ftindamental notion of the 
word. 

How finely chosen then are these words by St. 
James (i. 26, 27), and how rich a meaning do they 
contain. " K any man," he would say, " seem to 
himself to be 0pr}<rfco^y a diligent observer of the 
offices of religion, if any man would render a pure 
and undefiled dfyija/ceia to God, let him know that 
this consists not in outward lustrations or ceremonial 
observances ; nay, that there is a better dfyrfa/ceia 
than thousands of rams and rivers of oil, namely to 
do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly 
with his God " (Mic. vi. 7, 8) ; or, in the Apostie's 
own language, " to visit the widows and orphans in 
their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from 
the world " (cf. Matt, xxiii. 23). He is not herein 
affirming, as we sometimes hear, these offices to be 
the sum total, nor yet the great essentials, of true 
religion, but declares them to be the body, the 
dprjo'Kelay of which godliness, or the love of God, is 
the informing soul. His intention is somewhat ob- 
scured to the English reader from the fact that ' re- 
ligious ' and * religion,' by which we have rendered 
dpfja/cof^ and OpijaKela, possessed a meaning once 
which they now possess no longer, and in that 



NBW TBSTAMENT. 233 

meaning are here employed. St. James would, in 
fiictj claim for the Christian faith a superiority over 
the old dispensation, in that its very dfyqaKeia con- 
sists in acts of mercy, of love, of holiness, in that 
it has light ybr its ga/rment^ its very robe being 
righteousness ; herein how much nobler than that 
old, whose Ofyqatcela was merely ceremonial and 
formal, whatever inner truth it might embody. 
These observations are made by Coleridge {Aids to 
Reflections 1825, p. 15), who at the same time com- 
plains of our rendering of dprjaKo^ and OfyqaKcla as 
erroneous. But it is not so much erroneous as ob- 
solete ; an alternative indeed which he has himself 
suggested as its possible justification, though he 
was not aware of any such use of * religion ' in the 
time that our version was made as would bear out 
the translators. Milton however will at once sup- 
ply an example of a passage in which ^ religion ' is 
used to express an outward ceremonial service, and 
not the inner devotedness of heart and life to God. 
Some of the heathen idolatries he characterizes as 
being 

"adorned 
With gay religioM full of pomp and gold." 

Paradise Lost, b. i 

And our Homilies will supply many more : thus in 
that Agamst Peril of Idolatry : " Images used" for 
no religion^ or superstition rather, we mean of none 



234 SYNOlfYMS OF THE 

worshipped, nor in danger to be worshipped of any, 
may be suffered." A very instructive passage on 
the merely eoctemal character of dprja-Keia^ which 
also 1 am confident our translators intended to ex- 
press by their ' religion,' occurs in Philo {Quod Det, 
Pot. Insid. 7) ; having repelled those who would 
fain be counted among the euerc^w on the score of 
divers washings, or costly offerings to the temple, 
he proceeds : TrerrXdvrjrai yhp /cal oJfTo<: rfj^ wpo? 
eva-ilSeiav oSot), dpr)(TK€iav avrX oatorrfro^ iJyoiJ- 
/t6vo9. The readiness with which dfyq<rKe(a declined 
into the meaning of superstition, service of faltse 
gods (Wisd. xiv. 18, 27 ; xi. 16 ; Col. ii. 18), itself 
indicates that it had more to do with the form, than 
with the essence, of piety. Thus Gregory Nazian- 
zene {lami, xv.) : 

Qpr^ffK^iav oT8a iced Th lieu/xSpaf ffdfias, 
*H 8* eifffifieia vpoaK^vriffis TpidZos, 

To come now to the concluding word of this 
group. AeiaiSaifioDp, and Seia-vScufiopia as well, had 
at first an honourable use ; as perhaps also ^ super- 
stitio ' and ^ superstitiosus ' had ; at least there seems 
indication of such in the use of ' superstitiosus ' by 
Plautus {CuTGid. in. 27 ; Arrvphit. i. 1. 169). The 
philosophers first gave an unfavourable significance 
to SeuriSaifiopia. So soon as they began to account 
fear a disturbing element in piety, which was to be 



NEW TESTAMENT. 235 

eliminated from the true idea of it (see Plutarch, 
De And. Poet. 12 ; and "Wyttenbach, Anvmadd. in 
Plut i. 997), it was natural, indeed almost inevita 
ble, that they should lay hold of the word which 
by its very etymology implied and involved fear 
{SeunSaifiovia^ from Se/So)), and should employ it to 
denote that which they disallowed and condemned, 
namely, the * timer inanis Deorum ' (Cicero, De Nat, 
Deor. i. 41) ; in which phrase the .emphasis must 
not be laid on * inanis ' but on ' timer ;' cf. Augus- 
tine, Ds Civ, Deiy vi. 9 : Varro religiosum a super- 
stitioso eS distinctione discemit, ut a superstitioso 
dicat timeri Deos ; a religiose autem vereri ut pa- 
rentes ; non ut hostes timeri. 

But even after they had thus turned Beco'iSaifio- 
via to ignobler uses, to the being, as Theophrastus 
defines it, ieCKia irepi to Scufiovtovy it did not at once 
and altogether forfeit its higher significance. In- 
deed it remained to the last a fiiaov. Thus we not 
only find SeiaiSaifiayv (Xenophon, Ages. xi. 8 ; Oyrop. 
iii. 3. 68), and SeKriSai/juovia (Polybius, vi. 56. 7 ; 
Josephus, Antt. x. 3. 2), in a good sense ; but I am 
persuaded also employed in no ill meaning by St. 
Paul himself in his great discourse upon Mars' Hill 
at Athens. He there addresses the Athenians, " I 
perceive that In all things ye are <m ScKriSaifiovea' 
ripov<; " (Acts xvii. 22), which is scarcely, " too su- 
perstitious," as we have rendered it, or " allzu aber- 



SYKOHTMB OF THE 

glaiibisch/ as Luther ; but rather * reKgiosiores,' as 
Beza, *8ehr gottesfurchtig,' as De Wette, have 
given it.* For indeed it was not St. Paul's manner 
to aflfront his auditors, least of all at the outset 6f a 
discourse ; not to say that a much deeper reason 
than a mere calculating prudence would have hin- 
dered him, I believe, from expressing himself thus, 
namely, that he would not, any more than his great 
Master, quenclj the smoking flax, or deny the reli- 
gious element which was in heathenism. Many in- 
terpreters, ancient as well as modem, agree in this 
view of the intention of St. Paul; for example, 
Chrysostom, who makes h€iaiicufiov€arepov<i »— evXo- 
fi€<rripov^i and takes the word altogether as praise. 
Yet neither must we run into an extreme on this 
side. St. Paul selects with finest tact and skill, 
and at the same time with most perfect truth, a 
word which shaded off from praise to blame ; in 
which he gave to his Athenian hearers the honour 
which was confessedly their due as zealous worship- 
pers of the superior powers, so far as their know- 
ledge reached, being €V(rel5eardrov^ iravr&v vrSnf 
'EXKrivwv^ as Josephus calls them ; but at the same 
time he does not squander on them the words of 
very highest honour of all, reserviuff them for the 

' Bengel {in loc.) : ituriiai/iw, yerbum per ee /icVov, ideoque 
Ambiguitatem habet dementem, et exordio huio aptiBsimam. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 237 

true worshippers of the true and living God. And 
as it is thus in the one passage where SeuriSaificffp 
occurs, so also in the one where Beuri^cufiovia is to 
be found (Acts xxv. 19). Festus may speak there 
with a certain latent slight of the Seuri^cufjLovioj or 
overstrained way of worshipping God ('Gottesve- 
rehrung' De Wette translates it), which he con- 
ceived to be common to SU Paul and his Jewish 
accusers, but he would scarcely have called it a 
^ superstition ' in Agrippa's face, for it was the same 
which Agrippa himself also held (Acts xxvi. 3. 27), 
whom certainly he was very far from intending to 
insult. 



§ xlix. — Kkrjfia, xKaSo^. 

These words are related to one another by de- 
scent from a common stock, derived as they both 
are from /cXa&>, ' frango ; ' the fragile character of 
the branch, the ease with which it may be broken 
off, to be planted or grafted anew, constituting the 
basis and leading conception in both words. At 
the same time there is a distinction between them, 
this namely, that /cXajfia («=• ^palmes ') is especially 
the branch qf the vine {ofjirrriXov KkrjfAct^ Plato, Pol. 
L 353 a) ; while kKoSo^ (-« 'ramus ') is the branch, 
not the larger arm, of any tree ; and this distinction 



238 8TN0NYMB OF THE 

is always observed in the New Testament, where 
i^lia only occurs in the allegory of the True Tino 
(John XV. 2, 4, 6, 6 ; cf. Num. xiii. 24 ; Ps. badx. 
12 ; Ezek. xvii. 6) ; while we have mention of the 
kKo&ol of the mustard-tree (Matt. xiii. 82), of the fig- 
tree (Matt. xxiv. 32), <|f the olive-tree (Rom. xi. 16), 
and generally of any trees (Matt xxi. 8 ; cf. Ezek. 
xxxi. 7 ; Jer. "ni. 16 ; Dan. iv. 9). 



§1. 



[I have put together, and in a concluding article iubjoined, as 
there are readers to whom they may be welcome, a few passages 
from different authors, intended t# have illustrated some other 
synonyms of the New Testament, besides those which, after all, I 
haT6 found room to introduce into this Tolume.] 

a. xpiyoTOT^, a^aJBtocwq. — Jerome {Corwm,, in, 
Ep. ad Gal. v. 22) : Benigmtaa sive Buavitas, quia 
apud Greecos ypfiaroTryi utrumque sonat, virtus est 
lenis, blanda, tranquilla, et omnium bonorum apta 
consortio ; invitans ad familiaritatem sui, dulcis al- 
loquio, moribuB temperata. Non multum honitaa 
\apfa0tdaihni\ a benignitate di versa est ; quia et ipsa 
ad benefaciendum videtur exposita. Sed in eo dif- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 239 

fert; quia potest bonitas esse tristioT, et fronte sev^ 
lis moribus irrugatfi bene qxiidem facere et prsestare 
quod poscitur ; non tamen suavis esse consortio", et 
suS cunctos invitare dulcedine. 

13. ikirky irioTtf:. — Augustine {Enchvrid. 8): Est 
itaque fides et malarum rerum et bonarum : quia 
et bona creduntur et mala ; et hoc fide bonS, non 
malS. Est etiam fides est praeteritarum rerum, et 
prsesentium, et futurarum. Credimus enim Chris- 
tum mortuum ; quod jam praeteriit ; credimus sedere 
ad dexteram Fatris ; quod nunc est v credimus ven- 
turum ad judicandum; quod futurum est It^oa 
fides et suarum rerum est et alienarum. Nam et se 
quisque credit aliquando esse coepisse, nee fuisse 
utique sempitemum ; et alios, atque alia ; nee so- 
lum de aliis hominibus^ulta, que© ad religionem 
pertinent, verum etiam de angelis credimus. Spea 
autem non nisi bonarum rerum est, nee nisi futura- 
rum, et ad eum pertinentium qui earum spem ge- 
rere perhibetur. Qu8e cum ita sint, propter has 
caussas distinguenda erit fides ab spe, sicut rocabu- 
lo, ita et rationabili differentifi. Nam quod adtinet 
ad non videre sive quae creduntur, sive quce spe- 
rantur, fidei speique commune est. 

y« o^^A"*, aXpeai^. — Augustine {Con. Crescon. 
Don. ii. 7) : Schisma est recens congregationis ex 



2*10 STNONTliB OF THE 

aliqa& Bententiaram diverBitate disBensio; hasrems 
autem schiBina inveteratnin. 

5. fjLOKpodvfiia, irpaoTfj^. — Theophylact {In Gal* 
V. 22) : fuucpoOvfiCa irptiorfjTo^ iv rovrip Boxei iraph 
r§ 7pa^ huuf>ip€iv^ r^ rov fikv /uucpdOvfiop TFoXin/ 
iura hf <l>povija'€Cy fjuif 6^€»<: dXXxt (^X^^V ^^'r^^wu 
Tffp^wpoa^KOvaav SIktjp r^ irralovrc* rov Sk wpaop 
a^ipcu wcurrdiratrip, 

e. \otBop€a}y /3\aa<ffiffieio. — Oalvin {fiomm, m N. 
T. ; 1 Cor. iv. 12) : Notandum est discrimen inter 
hsec dao participia, XoiZopov/jtepoi, teal pKcur^fAovfi^ 
pot, Qaonia^l 7u>tBopla est asperior dicacitas, qusd 
non tantom perstringit hominem, sed acriter etiam 
mordet, famamqne apert^ contumelilt sngillat, non 
dubium est quin \oiSopetp sit maledicto tanquam 
aculeo vulnerare hominem ; proinde reddidi maU- 
dictie laceasitL B7uia<fnjfiia est apertius probmm, 
qunm qnispiam graviter et atrociter proscinditur. 

f. '^^vxi'Ko^y aap/u/c69. — Grotius {AnnoU. 4n N. 
T. ; 1 Cor. ii. 14) : Non idem est -^rvx^^ apOpeo^ 
iro^ et aapiciKo^. 'Vv2(tK6^ est qui hnmanss tantum 
rationis luce ducitur, aapicuci^ qui corporis affect!- 
bus gubematur; sed plerunque ^^vxi/coi aliqu& in 
parte sunt acLpKiKoL^ ut Greecorum philosophi scorta- 
tores, puerorum corruptores, glori» aucupes, male- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 241 

dici^ invidi. Verum hie (1 Cor. ii. 14) nihil aliud 
designatur quam homo humanS tantum ratione ni- 
tens, quales erant Judseornm plerique et philosophi 
G-rsecoruin. 

7), fi€Tavoea)y iMerafieXofjiaL. — liQiigAiGiiomon N. 
T. / 2 Cor, vii. 10) : Vi etymi fierdvoia proprie est 
mentis, fierafiiXeia vohmtatis ; quod ilia sententiam, 
hsec solicitudinem vel potins studium mutatum di- 
cat. . . . Utrumque ergo dicitur de eo, quem facti 
consiliive poenitet, sive poenitentia bona sit sive 
mala, sive malse rei sive bonae, sive cum mutatione 
actionum in posterum, sive eitra eam. Yerunta- 
men si usum spectes, ficTafieXeca plerunque est fiiaov 
vocabulum, et refertur potissimum ad actiones sin- 
gulares : fierdvoia vero, in N. T. praesertim, in bo- 
nam partem sumitur, quo notatur poenitentia totius 
vitse ipsorumque nostri quodammodo : sive tota ilia 
beata mentis post errorem et peccata reminiscentia, 
cum omnibus affectibus earn ingredientibus, quam 
fructus digni sequuntur. Hinc fit ut fieravoelv saepe 
in imperativo ponatur, fierafieXelaOac nunquam : 
ceteris autem locis, ubicunque fierdvota legitur, 
lierafieKeiav possis substituere : sed non contra. 

0. ai(oVj KoafJLo^, — Bengel {Ih. Eph. ii. 2): amv 
et K6(Tfio^ differunt, 1 Cor. ii. 6, 12 ; iii. 18. Ille 
hunc regit, et quasi informat : koc/jlo^ est quiddam 
11 



242 SYNONYMS OF THE 

exterius ; auav subtilius. And again (Eph. vi. 12) : 
Kocfuy; mundus, in susl extensione : aldv seculum, 
prsesens mundus in suS indole, cursu et censu. 

I. 7rpav<;, Tja-vxt^^- — Bengel (/&. 1 Pet. iii. 4): 
Mansuetus [7r/[>at5?], qui non turbat : tranquillua 
\ri<rvxf^^\ qui turbas aliorum, superiorum, inferi- 
orum, sequalium, fert placide . . . Adde, mansuetus 
in affectibus : tranquillus in verbis, vultu, actu. 

tc. dv7]T0<;j y€Kpo<;. — Olshausen {Optisc. TheoU. p. 
195): NeKpo<; vocatur subjectum, in quo sejunctio 
corporis et animse facta est : dvrjTo^^ in quo fieri 
potest. 

X. cXcos, oixTipfw^. — ^FritzscLe (Ad Bom. voL ii. p. 315) : 
Plus significari vocabulis h ohcnpfxos et olKnipuv quam ver- 
bis 6 lK€o<i et cXceiv recte veteres doctores vnlgo statuunt. 
Illis enim cum 1X009, lKa.opxu. et IXoo-ko/xcu, bis cum 01 et 
owcTos cognatio est. *0 cXcos segritudinem benevole ex 
miseriS, alterius baustam denotat, et commune vocabuliun 
est ibi collocandum, ubi misericordise notio in genere enun- 
tianda est ; o olKTipp.6^ aegritudinem ex alterius miserii 
Busoeptam, quae fletum tibi et ejulatum excitat, b. e. loag- 
nam ex alterius miserisi s^itudinem, miserationem deola- 
rat, 



APPENDIX. 



ADDENDA ET COKRIGENDA. 



Since the publication of the first edition of his admira- 
ble work on the " Synonyms of the New Testament," Mr. 
Trench has issued a second and a third edition. Several 
additions and corrections are made by the author in these 
last issues, partly based upon the criticisms of reviewers 
and others, but mainly the result of frequent and careful 
revisions of the volume. As these additions and correc- 
tions are of some importance, though not affecting the sub- 
stance of the work, it has been thought best to make a 
careful collation of the third with the first edition, and to 
incorporate, in the form of an Appendix, such changes and 
improvements as the author may have adopted. It is be- 
lieved that nothing of moment has escaped attention in 
this collation, and that the work is now as complete and 
thorough as the accomplished author could make it within 
the limits which he had prescribed to himself. 

J. A. flL 



244 APPENDIX. 

Page 13, line 2 : after the words " nntouohed by me,'' 
add the following note : 

It is possible that some reader of this book might like to have 
suggested to him a few of these, on which to exercise his own skill in 
svnonymous distinction. The following, then, were some which I had 
once proposed to myself to consider, but which I have now reserved for 
a second part, which I hope, but scarcely expect, hereafter to publish : 
— iLTroKvTpwffis, KcnaX\ayf}y iKour/xAs — iirwrros, cixet^s — iffMeroSf 
itra^oy^os — kypdfifiaTOSf i^i(&rris — AaA.€«, \4y(a—-irapoifj.iaf vapafioX'ff-- 
ypa\fi6s, vfiyosy tpH — 5o;«/wtf«, vetpd^a — hiifpl^Ktiffrpov^ craytivri, Zi- 
KTvov — Zir^iSy fjfX^i vpotrcvxhi ^vreu^is — fiouXii, OeKTUxct—duffla, trpoff' 
<popd — Tfpas, diyafiis, fftjficioy^-OKTr^is, ffr^voxf^p^o- — ff6<po5^ <pp6yifjLOS, 
ffvuerSs — Tcp(cr6roKOs, fAoyoyeirfjs — irdOos, iiriOvfiia — vihs Qeovy ircus 
&€0v — Kaiv6si v€os — &t5toy, oddyios — C<woy, Oriplov — ZucaiwfMy HuecdactSf 
6iKM,io(riiy7}—&}<\0Sy ercpos — ayid^oiy KaOapi((Of ayyi(oo — aVfiiraOdw, fie- 
Tpiowa64o»—&<f>daproSy afilavrosy dtfjutpdyros — xoXew, oyofid^ot—xapdf 
ikyaWiaais, einppociyri — fiop<fyfi^ exW'h *^^ — «r«oy, Sfivaios, ayvis^ 
Brfiosy Ka0ap6s — 5<J|a, rifi'fi — ^pts, ipiOela — <pav€p6o»^ ikiroKokihra — 
i.voKdKv^is, ivrcuriaf vpo^rjrela — \6yos, pTJfia — j3(£im(r/ia, fiam-iCfiSs 
•^—aiiapria^ a/JidpnifjMf trapcuciyfiy vapdirrmfM — ivirpoieosy oticoySfJLOs--^ 
iicucpoOvfilOf 6vofioyij, h.yoxh — K6'K0Sy fiSxOos — irr6ri(rtSf Odfi^os, ^Kora- 
ffiSy Kwrdwlis — <l>p4ap, ^nry^ — ydCa, OritravpSs — ffotpiay yyatriSy ivlyy»~ 
ffis — ffiydoot ffiwKda — ^lovcria, ^{nfafuSf KpdroSf iffx^s — Hxp^^^^^t ^" 
Xpe'tos — crpTiyiduf (rraraXdw^ rpv<pdoff^<pav\oSf KoutJs — a^ytcis, 8«£- 
roia — KtiycoSy <p6pos. 

Page 29, line 4 : after the words " of God," add : (Acts 
vii. 48 ; xviL 24 ; 1 Oor. vi. 19) ; the oIkos tov $€ov (Matt, 
xii. 4 ; cf. Exod. xxiii. 19). 

Page 29, line 7 : after the word '^ Holies," add : called 
often aytaxTfia (1 Macc. L 37 ; iiL 45). 

Page 47, line 6 : after c/iTroioOo-a, add : It is to those 
and similar definitions that Aulas Gkllias refers when he 
says {Noei. Att. vi. 14) : < Poniendis peceatis tres esse de- 



APPENDDt. 245 

here causas existimatum est. Una est qtise vovOea-la, Tel 
KoAao-ts, vel napaivfo-L^ dicitur ; cum poena adhibetar casti- 
gandi atque emendandi gratis ; ut is qui fortuito deliquit, 
attentior fiat, eorrectiorque. Altera est quam ii, qui voca- 
bula ista curiosius diviserunt, rifjuopLav appellant. Ea 
causa animadvertendi est, cum dignitas auctoritasque ejus, 
in quem est peccatum, tuenda est, ne praetermissa animad- 
versio contemtum ejus pariat, et hcmorem levet : idcircoque 
id ei vocabulum a conservatione honoris factum putant.' 

Pag^ 60, line 17 : after " 8e," add : Yet after all, in 
these distinctions whereby they sought to escape the embar- 
rassments of their ethical position, they did indeed effect 
nothing ; being only 6voiiaTOfid)(OL, as a Peripatetic adver- 
sary lays to their charge. See on this matter the full dis- 
cussion in Clement of Alexandria, Strom, ii. 7 — 9. 

Page 63, line 14 : after " worst sense," add note from 
Grotius • 

Grotius: *Cum quae possumus in bonam partem interpretari, in 
pejorem rapimus, contra qnam exigit officium dilectionis.' 

Page 64, line 16 : after " in them," add : for, according 
to our profound English proverb, " 111 doers are ill deem- 
ers." 

Page 67, line 6 : the passage from the words " from 
this last fact, etc. .; ... to a sister " (p. 68, line 2), is omit- 
ted in the third edition. 

Page 71, line 14 : after " love," add note from Gregory 
Nazianzene : 

H6dos 8* 6pt^is ^ KtOJev ^ ix^ KoXSov, 
^Eptos B\ Ocpfihs ZvtTKdBfKriis re ir60os, 

^Carm. ii. 34. 150, 151.) 



246 APPENDIX. 

Page 72, line 16: after << headlands,^' put reference 
(Plutarchy Timol, 8), and add : 

Hippias, in Plato's Gorgias (338a), charges the eloquent sophist, 
Prodicus, with a tf^6yeiy els rh v4ya\os r&y xSywy, kvoxp^ayra yrjr^ 
■which last idiom reappears in the French * noyer la terre/ applied to 
a ship sailing out of sight of land ; as indeed in Virgil's * Phseacum 
ahscondimus urhem.' 

Page 77, end of ^ xiv. : add : rather the degeneracy of 
a virtue than an absolute vice. 

Page 90, line 19 : after " heavenly Jerusalem," add : 
It was, he would teach them, a vot/tov opos, and not an at- 
(tOtjtov, to which they were brought near. Thus Knapp 
(Script var. Argum. p. 264) : * Videlicet to \lrr]Xa<lxi>fji€vov 
idem est, quod alo-Orjrovy vel quidquid sensu percipitur aut 
investigatur quovis modo ; plane ut Tacitus (Ann. iii. 12) 
ocidis contrectare dixit, nee dissimili ratione Cicero (Tusc. 
iii. 15) mente contrectare. Et Sina quidem mons ideo ai- 
o'OrjTO's appellatur, quia Sioni opponitur, quo in monte, quae 
sub sensus cadunt, non spectantur; sed ea tantum, quao 
mente atque animo percipi possunt, vot/to, 'jrveufxariKa, rjOucd. 
Apposite ad h. 1. Ohrysostomus (Ham. 32 in Ep. ad JSebr,) : 
Ilavra tolwv t6t€ alaOtird, koL oi/^cts, koI <f)0)V(u' irdvra 
vorjTOL Kol oLOpara vvv.^ 

Page 93, line 25 : for " memory," jead " recollection 
or reminiscence," and add the following note : 

Not *ineinoiy,' as I very erroneously had it in the first edition 
of this book. The very point of the passage in Olympiodorus is to 
bring out the old Aristotelian and Platonic distinction between * me- 
xnory ' (,^/Aij) and 'recollection' or < reminiscence* (&y«C/iyi7(n;), ^e 



APPENDIX. 247 

fint being iiistinctiye and oommon to beasts with men, the second 
being the reviying of faded impressions bj a distinct act of the will, 
the reflux, at the bidding of the mind, of knowledge which has once 
ebbed (Plato, Legg, v. 7326: iLvd/xyritris 8* 4crr\y im^^oij tppoirfictws 
&.wo\ifro6<rri5)i and as such proper only to man. It will at once be 
seen that of this only it can be said, as of this only Olympiodorus does 
say, that it is iraXtyyevca'ia r^s yvdxr^ws. 

Page 101, line 7 ; after " <l>avTaa-La,^^ add : or as South ; 
" The grief a man conceives from his own imperfections 
considered with relation to the world taking notice of them ; 
and in one word may be defined, grief up<m the sense of 
disesteem.^^ 

Page 102, line 10 : after " mere accident of it," add : 
The old etymologies of a'(i)ij>po<rvvrjy that it is so called as 
crw^oucra r^v <l}p6vrj(TLv (Aristotle, Ethic. Nic. vi. 5), or o-w- 
Trfpia T^s ^povrja-€o)s (Plato, Crat 411 e; cf. Philo, De 
Fori, 3), have about the same value which the greater 
number of the ancient etymologies possess. But Chryso»- 
tom rightly: a'<t><l>pO(rvvrj Xeyerat diro rov o-was rets <^p^ 
vas €X€iv. Set over against oKoKcuria. (Thucydides, iii. 37), 
and oLKpao-Ca (Xenophon, Mem, iv. 5), it is properly, etc. 

Page 103, line 9 : after " Diogenes Laertius, iii. 57. 91," 
add : In Jeremy Taylor's words {The House of Feasting^ : 
" It is reason's girdle, and passion's bridle ... it is pw/xiy 
^pvxq's, as Pythagoras calls it ; KprfirU apenjs, so Socratea ; 
Koo-jJLO'S ayaOijJV Travrm', SO Plato ; do-<^aA,€ta twv kclAAiWcdv 
Ifcwv, SO lamblichus." We find it often joined to Koo-ftto* 
TT/s (Aristophanes, Flut 563, 564) ; to cvrofta (2 Mace. iv. 
37) ; to Kafyrepia (Philo, De Agrie. 22). 



248 APP&NDIX. 

Page 108, line 16 : after " is wanting," add : Thus Da- 
rius would have been well pleased not to have taken Baby- 
lon, so that Zopyrus were oXoxXiypos still (Plutarch, Beg, et 
Imper. Apotheg.). Again, unhewn stones, etc. 

Page 118, line 14: after ^^TcHe^'^ add: and more at 
length in his description severally of Covetise and Avarice 
in the Bomaunt of the Rose^ 183-246. 

Page 137, line 2 : from the words " the passages," etc. 
to the end of the section, is omitted in the second and third 
editions. 

Page 144, line 17: after ^^ Enoyclopddiey^^ omit the 
next sentence, and read the last paragraph, as altered, thus : 
The three words, then, are clearly distinguishable from 
one another, have very different provinces of meaning seve- 
rally belonging to each : they present to us an ascending 
scale of guilt ; so that, seeking to sum up the whole in 
fewest words, one might say, as has been observed already, 
that the three severally express the boaster in words, the 
proud in thoughts, and the injuriouB in acts. 

Page 160, line 3 : aftw " seem good," add : to Him 

who has the power and right to do the one or the other ; 

nith this note : 

Fritzsohe (Ad Rom. vol. i. p. 199) : * Convenitint in hoc [jUtpciris et 
irdpeffts] quod sive ilia, sive hmc tibi obtigerit, nulla peccatoram tno- 
rum ratio habetur ; discrepant eo, quod, h4c dat&, facinorum tnorum 
pOBnas nimquam pendes ; ilia concessa, non diutius nullas peccatorum 
tnormn poenas lues, quam ei in iis connivere placuerit, cni in delicta 
toa animadvertendi jus sit* 

Page 160, line 24 : after " without it," add the follow- 
ing note : 



APPENDIX. 249 

Still more anfortnnate is a passage to whicli Ldsiier (Ohss, e PM- 
loae, p. 249) refere from Philo (Qiwd Det, Pot. Ins, 47) in proof that 
wdp€<ris = &<l>€a'ts. A glance at the actual words is sufficient to show 
that LSsner, through some inadvertence, has misunderstood its meon- 
iDg altogether. 

Page 162, line 10 : after " ©€ou," add : this avoxn be- 
ing the correlative of iropco-ts, as x^*^ ^^ ^^ a<^€o-t9 ; so that 
the finding of avoxrj here is a strong confirmation of that 
view of the word which has been just maintained. 

Page 162, line 13 : after " render it," add : (deducing 
the word, but wrongly, from 7rapct)u,t, * praetereo '). 

Page 163, line 1 : after " to evil,^' add : that such with 
too many was the consequence of the avo)(rj rod ®€ov, the 
Psalmist himself declares (Ps. 1. 21). 

Page 167, line 15 : in place of note here, insert the 

following note : 

Chrysostom, who, like most great teachers, often turns etymo- 
logy into the materials of exhortation, does not fail to do so here. To 
other reasons why the Christian should renounce evrpaircAia he adds 
this (Horn, 17 in Ephes.) : "Opa koX avTh roHj/ofxa • evrpdvcXos \4yeTai 
6 iroiKi\os, 6 vavroSairhs, 4 Aa-raroSy 6 tHKoKos, 6 irdvra ytySfievos • 
rovro 9^ ir6pp(o ray ry Herpc^ Bov\ev6yTwy, Tax^os rp4irercu 6 rotov- 
Tos K(d fjL€di<rrarai. 

— and put the words ** that St. Paul," etc. after " exclu- 
sively acquired," line 20. 

Page 174, line 2 : put the note here referred to in the 
text, and add the following note : 

A reviewer in The Ecclesiastic, J^y> 1854, of the first edition of this 
l>ook, to whom I would willingly be thankful for much praise, and fof 
jiointing out to me some errors, which I have since removed, has 
thought good to charge me with saying here what I knew, while I 



250 APPENDIX. 

said it, to be untrae. His words are : ^^ It is not * an attempt some- 
fcVne*' to limit the Xurovftyla to the Encharistic celebration that haa 
been made. It is the universal language, as Mr. Trench must know locfl, 
of all Catholic Ecclesiastical writers," p. 297. It might have suf&ced 
to charge me with ignorance, and not with' wilful falsehood in my 
st^itement ; and for repelling this charge of ignorance, I will content 
myself with quoting a single passage from Bingham's Antiquities (xiii. 
1.8): " [The Greek writers] usually style all hdy offices, and all parts 
ofDinne Service, by the general name o^ K^irowpyia, But it is never 
used, as the Romanists would appropriate it, for the business of sacri- 
ficiiig only ;** and of this he gives ample proof in his notes. Cf. Sui- 
cer, Thes, s. v. ; Deyling, Ohss. Sac, voL i. p. 285 ; and Augusti, Christl. 
Archaol. vol. ii. pp. 537, 538. 

Page 180, line 10 : after " rtucopta?/' add : So Gregory 
Nazianzene (Carm. ii. 34. 43, 44) — 

dvfjths fi4v iffriv d£p6os (ecis <l>p4voSf 
opy)] 8^ Bvfxhs iixixivav. 

Page 181, line 7 : after " wrath of God," add : who 

would not love good, unless He hated evil, the two being 

inseparable, so that either He must do both or neither ; 

— :and also the following note : 

See on this anger of God, as the necessary complement of his love, 
the excellent observations of Lactantius (i>e Ira Dei, c. 4] : * Nam si 
Deus non irascitur impiis et injustis, nee pios utique justosque diligit. 
In rebus enim diversis aut in utramqud partem moveri necesse est, ant 
in nuUam.' 

Page 199, line 25 : after " straight room," add : It is 
sometimes used in a figurative sense, and then expresses 
what we, employing exactly the same image, are accus- 
tomed to call the relaxation of morals (Philo, De Cherub 
27). 

Page 205, last line : to " in Scripture," add as note : 



APPENDIX. '' 261 

They will do this, even though they stop short of lengths to which 
Fritzsche, a very learned but nnconsecrated modern expositor of the 
Romans, has reached ; who on Rom. L 7, writes : • Deinde consideraji- 
dum est formula x^P*^ ^M**' '^"^ ^ipiivrj in N. T. nihil aliud dici nisi 
quod Graeci iUo suo x^-^P^^^ s. c? irpdrretv enxmtiare consueverint, h. e. 
ut aliquis fortunatus sit, sive, ut cum Horatio loquar, £p, i. 8. 1, ut 
gpvudeat et bene rem gerat ! * 

Page 209, line 5 : for the sentence begiiming " Plato," 
etc. read : In the Definitions which go under Plato's name 
(4125) it is defined 8fKatW, etc. 

Page 218, line 22 : after " sinful world," add : One 
might almost suppose, as it has been suggested, that there 
was allusion here to the Levitical ordinance, according to 
which Aaron and his sons in the priesthood were to be 
washed once for aM from head to foot at their consecration 
to their office (Exod. xxyii. 4 ; xL 12) ; but were to wash 
their hands and their feet in the brasen laver as often as 
they afterwards ministered before the Lord (Exod. zxx. 
19, 21 ; xl. 31). Yet this would commend itself more, if 
we did not find hands and feet in the same category there, 
while here they are not merely disjoined, but set over 
against one another (John xiii. 9, 10). Of this however I 
cannot doubt, that the whole mystery, etc. 

Page 225, ^ xlvii : this section has been enlarged «id 
rewritten, as follows : 

^xlvii. — x"P^^' c\€09. 
Xdpus is a word in manifold aspects full of interest ; it 
would be difficult to find another in the uses of which the 
Greek mind utters itself more clearly. I do not propose 



252 APPENDIX. 

however now to consider it in more aspects than one, that 
is, in its relations to IXco?, and as signifying the divine fa- 
vour and grace. I shall only consider how far, and in what 
respects the x^P^^ ®^o^ (Rom. vi. 14, 15 ; xi. 6 ; Gal. ii. 
21 ; Heb. xiii. 9) differs from the oVcos (Luke i. 50 ; Eph. 
ii. 4 ; 1 Pet. i. 3), his grace from his mercy. 

The freeness of the outcomings of God's love is the 
central point of the x^P^'>' Thus take the remarkable defi- 
nition of the word which Aristotle supplies, and in which, 
though he is but speaking of the x"-P^^ ^^ men, he lays the 
whole weight on the fact that it is a benefit conferred with- 
out hope or expectation of return, finding its only motive 
in the liberality and free-heartedness of the giver (Bhet 
ii, 7) : coTO) Sq X^P'-'^f '^^^ V ^ ^X^^ Xiycrai X^-P*"^ rnrovpyeiv 
T<5 Sco/xej'w, ^XT] aiT\ rti/os, yxiyS' Iva ri aurw rw virovpiyovvTL, 
dAA' Iva Ikuvid tl. Agreeing with this we have x^^P'^ '^^ 
Siopiaj Polybius, i. 31. 6 ; cf. Rom. iii. 24 (Scupcav rg avrov 
XaptTi) ; v. 15, 17; xii. 3, 6 ; xv. 15; so X'^P^'* '^**^ cwota, 
Plato, Lec/g. xi. 931 a; x'^P'-^ opposed to fiurOos, Plutarch, 
Lye. 15 ; cf. Rom. xi. 6, where St. Paul sets x^P'^ ^^^ h- 
ya over against one another in sharpest antithesis, showing 
that they mutually exclude one another, it being of the 
essence of that which is owed to x^tpt? that it is imeamed 
and unmerited, — :as Augustine urges so often, * Gratia, nisi 
gratis sit, non est gratia;' — or indeed demeritedj as the 
faithful man would most freely acknowledge. 

But while xio^s bas thus reference to the sins of men, 
and is that blessed attribute of God which these sins caU 



APPENDIX. 258 

out and display, his/red gift in their forgiveness, IXcos has 
special and immediate regard to the misery which is the 
consequence of these sins, being the tender sense of this 
misery displaying itself in the effort, which only the con- 
tinued perverseness of man can hinder or defeat, to assuage 
and entirely remove it. But here as in other eases it may 
be worth our while to consider the anterior uses of this 
word, before it was assumed into thb its highest use as the 
mercy of Him, whose mercy is over all his works. Of 
cXcos we have this definition in Aristotle (Shet. iL 8) : 
Sjtcd 8^ l\€09> \virq rts lin KJxuyofJLsyt^ Kojcio if>OapTiM^ icol A,v- 
rrrfpt^ rov avti$iov Tvy)(av€LV, o kvlv avros wpoaBoicqa^ifv &v 
iraBuVi ri Tiijv airov riva. It will be at once perceived that 
much will have here to be modified, and something remo- 
ved, when we come to speak of the divine IXcos. Grief 
does not and cannot touch Him, in whose presence is ful- 
ness of joy ; He does not demand unworthy suffering 
(XvTnj a»s tm ava$uai KOKOTroOovvTL, which is the Stoic defini- 
nition of cXcos, Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 63)* to move 
Him, seeing that absolutely imworthy suffering there is 
none in a world of sinners ; neither can He who is lifted 
up above all chance and change, contemplate, in beholding 
misery, the possibility of being Himself entangled in the 
same. It is not to be wondered at, that the Manichseans 
and others who wished for a G^d as unlike man as possible, 

^ So Cicero (TVtc. iv. 8. 18) : * Misericordia est segritudo ex mise* 
ri4 alterins injurid laborantis. Nemo enim pamcidse ant proditoria 
suppficio miserioordia commovetur.' 



254 APPENDIX. 

cried out against the attribution of cAtos to Him ; and 
found here a weapon of their warfare against that Old 
Testament, whose God was not ashamed to proclaim Him- 
self a God of pity and compassion (Ps. IxxviiL 38 ; Ixxxvi. 
15; and often). They were favoured here in the Latin 
by the word ^ misericordia,' and did not fail to appeal to 
its etymology, and to demand whether the ^miserum cor' 
could find place in Him. Augustine is engaged in contin- 
ual controversy with them. To their objection he answered 
truly that this and all other words used to express human 
affections did require certain modifications, a clearing away 
from them of the infirmities of human passions, before they 
could be ascribed to the Most High ; but that these for all 
this were but the accidents of them, the essentials remain- 
ing unchanged. Thus De Div, QucBst. ii. 2 : * Item de 
misericordid, si auferas compassionem cum eo, quern mise- 
raris, participatae miseriae, ut remaneat tranquUla bonitas 
subveniendi et a miserid liherandi^ insinuatur divinae mise- 
ricordisB qualiscunque cognitio :' cf. De Civ. Deij ix. 5. 
We may say then that the x^P^^ of God, his free grace and 
gift, is extended to men, as they are guilty ^ his IXcos, as 
they are miserable. The lower creation may be, and is, 
the object of God's ckeo^, inasmuch as the burden of man's 
curse has redounded also upon it (Job xxxviii. 41 ; Ps. 
cxlvii. 9 ; Jon. iv. 1 1 ; Rom. viii. 20-23), but of his x«f>^5 
man alone ; he only needs it, he only is capable of receiv- 
ing it. 

In the Divine mind, and in the order of our salvation 



APPENDIX. 256 

as conceived therein, the 2\€os precedes the x"P'5. God so 
hved the world with a pitying love (herein Was the tXco^) 
that he gave his only-begotten Son (herein the x^P'^)* *^^* 
the world through Him might be saved (cf. Eph. ii. 4 ; 
Luke i. 78, 79). But in the order of the manifestation of 
God's purposes of salvation the grace must go before the 
mercy, the x^p^? niust make way for the lA-cos. It is. true 
that the same persons are the subjects of both, being at 
once the guilty and the miserable ; yet the righteousness 
of God, which it is quite as necessary should be maintained 
as his love, demands that the guilt should be done away, 
before the misery can be assuaged ; only the forgiven may 
be blessed. He must pardon, before He can heal ; men 
must be justified before they can be sanctified. And as 
the righteousness of God absolutely and in itself requires 
this, so not less does the same, as it has expressed itself in 
the moral constitution of man, having there linked misery 
with guilt, and made the first the inseparable companion 
of the second. From this it follows that in each of the 
apostolic salutations where these words occur, x^-P'-^ F^^ 
oedes lA-cos (1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2 ; Tit. i. 4 ; 2 John 
3) ; nor could the order of the words have been reversed. 



alffx^vrt 

curia 
<w&y . 
hXaii&v . 

aX7}0iy($s . 

a,vd9r\na 
itvaKaiv»<ris 
kydiraviriv . 
&ve(r($ . 
iarrlxpi(f^ot 
Airrofjuu 
a<r4Kytta . 
afforrla . 



INDEX. 


•PAOS 




. 238 


fiios . 


66 


fi\a(T^IJi4i» 


98, 102 


fi6<rK» 


289 




. 164 


duKia . 


98 


Ii€i<ridalfi9ty 


. 194 


UttrvSTTis 


81 


ZidZflfM . 


. 241 


ZidKoyos 


137 


dov\os 


. 182 




48 


•EjSpoubf 


. 48 


eU^y . 


86 


iKK\ri<rta 


. 85 


ItXaioy 


92 


(Ktyxos 


. 198 


i\4yx^ . 


198 


tKtos . 


. 146 


iKK{^i» 


89 


iKirii . 


. 88 


ixitUfia . 


83 


ixtTlflAM 


. 14 


if^J^ 


167, 243 


€v\d$fia 



PAQI 

128 
240 
120 

68 

227 

184 

112 

53 

68 

185 

77 

17 

182 

31 

81 

226 

106 

289 

207 

81 

194 

63 



INDEX. 



257 



thKafi-fis 
tv<rtfi'fis 
tirrpaxtXia 

(rjKot . 

M . . 

$d\aff(ra 
$9i6n^s . 
0(oirtfi'fl9 

dtpdirtty 
diyydytt 

BpriffKos . 
dvfi6t 

Up6v . 

*I<rpai7A(Ti}f 

Kcuda 
Kcuevfidtia 
K\dios . 
ic\4imis 

HkTJfJLa 

K6\curts 

K6(TflOS . 
K^plOS 

Xc^ixds . 
\arpt6m 
Kurovpytu 

Xii/Xwr . 



PAGI 




PAOI 


. 227 


fiaicpo0v/xla 


. 240 


227 


fJMVrt^OfJLOl . 


40 


. 164 


fjifrafi4\ofMu 


. 241 




/i€TOyO€» 


241 


124 


fiialw 


. 161 


. 128 


fJLOX^VW , 


161 




fiifpov 


. 182 


242 


li9tpoXoyU . 


. . 164 


. 72 


pa6s . 


. 28 


24 


VfKp6s • 


242 


. 227 


ylwrm 


. 216 


24 


vov9c<rfa 


162 


. 68 






89 


6k6K\7ipos . 


. 108 


. 242 




. . 77 


227 


6/ioiuais . 


. . 77 


. 178 


Wi • 


. . 178 


. 28 


iraidtla . 


162 


186 


'Ka\tyytv€<ria 


. 92 


. 186 




17 




irdptais 


. 167, 248 


60 


wapopytirfUs . 


178 


. 60 


'w4\ayos 


. 72 


287 


xtmis . 


176 


. 211 


tricrris 


. 289 


287 


TA.cov€|(a 


117 


46,242 


'ir\{>ym 


. 215 


241 


frotfudvm 


120 


. 184 


jroyripU 


. 60 




xpa6rrit 


201, 207, 240 


219 


•Kpats 


. 242 


. 171 


vpoipriTtCw 


40 


171 


TTWX^S . 


. 176 


. 211 






240 


<rapKiK6t 


240 


. 216 


CKXripit ., . 


. . 74 


219 


OT^^avot 


112 



258 



moEx. 





PAGS 




PAOS 




. 17 


<pe6pot 


. 124 


avpta 


105 


<t>i\apyvpia . 


. 117 


aX^fffia 


. 289 


<pt\4u 


. 65 


aoKppoariyrj 


102 


<p6fios . 


58 






4>&s . . . 


. 219 


rav€tvo(ppo(rvirr} , 


. 201 


tpatTTflp . . . 


2>9 


r*\€ios . 


108 






rifjiupia . 


. 46, 242 


X^is • 


225 






XfWJiTTiJTTJf . 


. 238 


vfipiar-fis 


137 


Xpiof . 


182 


{nr€p^(f>avos 


. 137 






iinipfTirjs 


63 


i^€v96xpi<rros 


. 146 






y^\a4>i(» 


80 


<l>4yyo5 


. 219 


t^X»«'^J • 


240 



n. 



INDEX OF OTHER WORDS. 



. 


PAQB 




PAGI 


Abbild . 


. IS 


Call . . . 


. 20 


Admonitio . 


164 


Calo . 


20 


^mulor . 


. 126 


Candela . 


. 228 


ityairfi . 


10 


Caritas 


71 


kK6\affTos . 


. 168 


Castigatio 


.46 


Altare . 


42 


Cautio . . . 


60 


&iJii\Ka 


. 126 


dementia . 


. 208 


Amo . 


66 


Congregatio . 


22 


&vay4yvri<Tis 


. 92 


Convict . 


. 84 


Andacht 


228 


Convince 


88 


*AvriKdru)V 


. 146 


Convocatio 


. 22 


Antipater 


14Y 


Corona . 


118 


avriSeof 


. 146 


Correptio . 


. 166 


Ara 


42 


Covetousnesa 


117 


kper-fi 


. 41 


Cultus 


. 281 


Austenis 


'76 






Avarice . 


. Ill 


Defile . 


161 






Defoul 


. 161 


Beflecken . 


161 


Deitas . 


27 


Benignitas 


. 288 


Despot 


. 186 


fitveos . 


14 


Diadema 


118 


Beriihren . 


. 90 


Dilectio 


. 71 


Besudeln 


161 


Diligo . 


66 


Betasten . 


. 90 


Divinatio . 


. 43 


Biography . 


180 


Divinitas 


27 


Bonitaa . 


. 289 


Donarium 


. 86 


$wti6s . 


42 


Drag . 


106 


Bdsewicht 


. 61 


Draw 


. 106 



260 



DTDEX. 





PAGS 




PAQI 


Egestas . 


. 177 


L6sel 


. 84 


Eifersucht . 


• . 126 


Laderlich 


86 


Equity 


. 209 


Luxuria, luxuriosus . 


. 84 


''Epott . 


71 






Eruditio . 


. 154,156 


Macula . . . 


152 


fviaifxovla 


41 


Malitia . 


. 61 


Exaeerbatio 


. 181 


Manier . 


90 


ExcandesceDtia . 


179 


Mansuetu^ 


. 242 






fioyriK-fi . 


43 


Fair . 


. 23 


fxiyrit 


. 42 


Fascia . . . 


113 


Mendicus 


176 


Feria 


. 23 


Mercatus . 


. 2S 


Fur . . . 


211 


Metus . 


69 


Furor 


. 179 


Moderatio . 


. 103 






Modestia 


108,208 


Gasconade . 


139 






Geiz . 


. 117 


Nacheiferung 


126 


Gloriosus 


140 


Nachschleppen . 


. 108 


Glorious . 


. 140 


vffifffiuf y4fi€<ris . 


127 


Grecian 


193 










Ostentation 


. 189 


Habsucht . 


. 117 






'EXXrivKTr^s . 


187 


Palmes . 


237 


*OKor€X4is . 


. 112 


Panegyric . 


. 28 


Huten . 


121 


Pasco . 


122 






Pauper, paupei-tas . 


. 176 


Imago 


. 78 


Pelagus 


72 


Indigentia . 


119 


Tlev4(rT<u . 


. 176 


Indignatio 


. 179 


Penuria 


176 


Inquino 


161 


Perditus . 


. 84 


Integer, integritas 


. 109 


ir4pr€pos 


140 


Interpretor- . 


63 


Peto .... 


. 196 






Petulantia . 


87 


Ka\4c0 


. 20 


Pietas 


. 228 


Klept . 


214 


rr6vros . 


74 






PrsBtermission . 


. 169 


lubes 


. 162 


Prahlerei . 


139 


Latro 


211 


Prodigus . 


. 84 


Life . 


. 128 


VpOffalTTIf 


177 



11* 



INDEX. 



261 





PAM 




Protervitas 


87 


Thief 


Pudor .... 


99 


$u<rtturTfiptov . 
Timor 


Regeneratio 


98 


Toucher 


Religio. 


280 


Traho 


Religion, religious .. 


282 


Tranquillus . 


ReligiosuB . 


231 


Turpiloquium 


Renovatio 


98 




Reprove 


83 


Ultio . 


Robber . • . . 


211 


Uppishness 


Rogo .... 


196 


Urbanitas 


Scatterling 


84 


Verax . 


Scurrilitaa . 


168 


Verecundia . 


Shamefastv shamefastness . 


104 


VeruB 


Similitudo . 


19 


Vita . 


Simnltaa . . . . 


126 


Vitiositas . 


Spurco .... 


161 


Vorbild 


Stain . . . . 


152 




Stilts .... 


141 


Wahrsi^en 


Stolz . . . . 


141 


"Wantonness . 


Stout .... 


141 


Weiden . 


Stultiloquy 


166 


Weiasagen . 


Superbia 


141 


Widerchrist 


Superstitio, superstitiosus 


234 


Worship 


Tenia . . . . 


118 


Ziehen 


Temperantia 


108 


Zoology 


9foyw€ala . . . . 


97 


Zom. 



PAI» 

212 

41 

68 

90 

106 

242 

166 

46 
142 
168 

48 
100 

48 
128 

61 

78 

42 

88 

121 

42 

148 

227 

108 
180 
179 



m 

INDEX OF TEXTS KEFEBBED TO. 



MATTHBW. 




Ch.ziz.' 


vet. 16, page 182 


MABE. 












21. 


Ill 








(»uip.U. 


▼«;2,iw0el91 




28, 


94 


Chap.iiL Ter. 5,pagel81 


Ui. 


IT. 


68 




28, 


95 




29, 


198 


It. 


10. 


1T8 


zz. 


15. 


126 


ir. 


40, 


58 




1«. 


819 




83, 


128 


vL 


18, 


184 


▼. 


H 


51 


zzi 


8, 


288 


Yli. 


8. 


216 




16. 


319 




18. 


212 




21,22, 


126 




25. 


5T 




28, 


80 




21,22, 


87 




8T. 


62 


zzU. 


2,14, 


56 




21,22, 


117 




48, 


111 




12, 


84 




21,22, 


141 


vt 


IT, 


816 




18 


56 


iz. 


26, 


82 




22. 


219 




20. 


79 




48,48, 


47 




28, 


220 




8T. 


68 


zlL 


44, 


129 


▼U. 


».T. 


196 




15. 


72 


ziiL 


22. 


148 




14. 


182 




28, 


282 




24, 


219 


▼Ui 


28. 


58 




85. 


80 


zv. 


T. 


218 


ix. 


8, 


82 


zzlv. 


24, 


148 


zvt 


1. 


184 


zL 


28. 
28,29. 


198 
200 




29, 
29. 


219 
220 










22. 


208 




82, 


288 


LUKB. 






28. 2». 


206 




48, 


211 








zU. 


86. 


164 


ZZY. 


4, 


228 


t 


6. 


829 




48. 


198 




24, 


74 




10, 


80 


zUL 


24. 


220 




46. 


46 




28, 


178 




«T,80. 


56 




46, 


47 




51. 


141 




82, 


288 


ZZTi 


56. 


80 




T8.79, 


226 


XT. 


1. 


220 




56. 


212 


U. 


26, 


228 


ZTi 


18, 


80 


zzyU. 


6, 


81 




29. 


187 




22, 


82 




16. 


218 


iv. 


18, 


186 


ZTttL 


«. 


78 




29. 


116 




20.* 


57 




IT. 


20 




2T-«), 


148 


▼. 


2. 


216 




28. 


209 




29.8T.41, 


191 


yl 


20. 


177 




82,84. 


168 




8T. 


84 


TiL 


46, 


188 


Six. 


18, 


88 








▼HI 


14. 


181 



INDEX. 263 

Ob. TiiL Ter.48, psge 129 €h. vtiL ver. 9, page 82 Chap. iv. ver. 24, page 187 



iz. 


88, 


219 




20, 


80 




27, 


186 


X. 


27, 


68 




46. 


82 


V. 


IT, 


124 




80, 


212 


ix. 


2, 


184 




22, 


67 




80. 


218 




8,86.6, 


67 


vL 


1, 


187 


xi. 


11. 


196 




7. 


216 


vii 


T, 


178 


xiii. 


9, 


164 




8. 


177 




22, 


164 


xiv. 


», 


99 




16. 


82 




88. 


21 




18, 


88 




81. 


227 


vlil. 


2, 


228 




82, 


190 


X. 


11. 


122 




8, 


105 


XV. 


12. 


129 


xL 


22. 


197 




8, 


143 


xvL 


14, 


118 




8.86. 


67 


ix. 


5, 


44 




20,21, 


176 


xii 


6, 


211 




81. 


69 


xvlli 


82, 


148 




82. 


106 




8T, 


217 




^9, 


82 


xiiL 


6, 


216 


X. 


2. 


227 


six. 


31. 


74 




10. 


217 




88. 


185 




24, 


66 


xiv. 


16. 


197 


xL 


5, 


44 


xxL 


6, 


89 




27. 


68 


xiL 


20. 


195 




15»17, 


68 


XV. 


1. 


62 


XiiL 


2. 


178 




87, 


80 




8, 


21S 




5. 


67 


xxlL 


61, 


67 




8, 4, 6. 6. 


283 




16, 


198 


xxiU. 


1«, 


154 


xvi 


8» 


88 


xiv 


16, 


162 




40. 


82 




1». 


195 




19, 


105 


xxlv. 


89, 


90 




28. 
28. 
26, 


194 
196 
197 


xvt 


16. 
19. 
22.28, 


40 
105 
148 


JOHN. 




xviL 


8. 


48 


xvii. 


6, 


105 










9,15,20. 


197 




22, 


285 


L 


8, 


224 


xvlii. 


8, 


220 




28, 


42 




9, 


61 




8. 


222 




27, 


90 




12, 


92 




18. 


67 




80. 


J62 




IT, 


61 




28. 


151 


xlx. 


18, 


188 




18. 


68 




82. 


67 




82,89.40. 


13 




47, 


198 




40, 


218 


xxL 


29.80, 


29 


IL 


A 


66 


xxi 


6,8,11. 


107 




80. 


105 




H 


80. 




15. 17. 


121 


xxlii. 


H 


89 




IT. 


124 




16. 17, 


68 


xxiv. 


28, 


199 


iU. 


8. 


97 




16.16,17, 


69 


XXV. 


19, 


287 




20. 


82 








xxvi 


8.27. 


287 




88, 


48 










26. 


102 




85. 


68 


THE ACTS. 






29, 


167 


▼. 


20, 


68 
















86. 


188 


ii. 


6. 


228 










88, 


219 




22, 


198 


EOMANS. 






8B. 


61 


ill 


2. 


196 










86. 


224 




12. 


198 


i. 


T, 


826 


▼1. 


82, 


6t 




16. 


108 




18. 


168 




44, 


106 




21, 


94 




20, 


24 




49. 


62 




21. 


96 




20. 


25 


▼«. 


82, 


67 


iv. 


24, 


72 




24.82, 


162 



264 INDEX. 

Obai».LT«r.89, page 61 Ohap.zl. t«f. T, p«ge 81 Oh«p. y. T«r. 4, pags SM 

29, 62 zlL 8, 89 ill 7, 65 

29, 68 xilL 4, 140 Iv. 2, 306 

80, 18T xiv. 20, 61 8, 178 

80, 143 20, 110 5, 164 

IL 8, 178 24,26. 82 18, 110 

9,10, 191 82, 44 14, 110 

lli 4, 84 XV. 88, 41 18, 182 

4, 48 xvl 22, 89 19, 87 

18, 69 28, 96 

25, 168 26, 180 

26, 161 2d CX)RINTHIANS. 29, 164 
V. ■ 12, 182 82, 61 

vliL 15, 69 • L 2, 226 v. 8,6, 119 

21,28, 95 21, 185 ' 4» 166 

28, 68 iiL 6, 55 4, 167 

88, 128 It. 16, 96 18, 88 

Ix. 8, 89 V. 4, 128 tL 4, 162 

4, 178 vlL 1, 162 4, 164 

4, 198 6, 198 4^ 166 

16, 288 10, 241 6, 69 

z. 2, 124 iz. 2, 124 9, 185 

xL 16, 288 22. 187 12, 242 

xiL 2, 96 26, 211 

2, 97 X. 1, 210 

16, 142 xi 22, 187 PHILIPPIANS. 

ziil. 12, 219 xiL 20, 126 

18, 187 21, 87 t 2, 126 

18, 124 29, 198 IL 10, 116 

18, 126 15, 61 

X7. 16, 178 15, 819 

27, 178 GALATIANS. 16, 821 

17, 178 

i 8, 226 25,80, 178 

iBT 00BINTHIAN8. 8, 9, 89 ilL 6, 198 

18, 198 12,15, 112 

i 8, 226 iL 14^ 198 15, 110 

It 6, 110 V. 19, 87 15, 187 

6,12, 241 20, 126 15, 183 

14, 240 20,81, 124 iv. 8, 41 

UL 18, 241 22, 188 

iv. 12, 240 22, 888 

V. 8» 61 22, 240 OOL088IAN8. 

10, 117 vL 1, 807 

11, 119 t 15, 79 
▼ilL 8, 68 28, 65 

7, 161 EPHESIANS. iL 9, 84 

iz. 9, 175 9, 85 

84^86, 114 i. 8, 926 17, 00 

zL 7, T9 * ii. 8, 841 18, 884 



INDEX. 



26i) 



[>. ii. vei 


.21, page 


91 


Chap. iL ver. 26, page 207 


Chap. Iyer. 26, 27, p. 232 


iii. 


5, 

8, 


119 
61 


iii. 


2, 


187 


ii. 


2, 
6, 


21 

105 




8, 


166 








iii. 


2, 


111 




8. 


178 


TITUS. 






9, 


81 




10, 


88 










14. 


124 




10, 


96 


i. 


2. 


48 


iv. 


6, 


141 




12, 


206 




4, 


225 




6, 


142 


iv. 


1, 


185 




6, 


88 




16, 


188 










15. 


151 


V 


4, 


184 








iL 


9, 


135 








FHESS 


A.LONIA 


N8. 


iii. 


2, 


207 
















5. 


94 


lOT PBTEE. 




L 


», 


48 




5, 


96 








!L 


2, 


143 








L 


8, 


63 


V. 


28, 


103 










18,28, 


92 




28, 


112 


HEBREWS. 






17, 


59 
















19. 


224 








L 


8, 


80 




28, 


98 


IHESS 


AIX)NIA 


JJ8. 




9, 


186 


ii. 


1. 


61 








iii 


6, 


58 




9, 


220 


I 


T, 


200 




5, 


64 




9. 


227 




7, 


198 


V. 


7, 


69 




18, 


185 


It 


8,8, 


145 




14, 


110 


liL 


4, 


242 




4, 


147 


vt 


6, 


96 




«, 


184 








viiL 


2. 
2, 


60 
174 


iv. 


8, 
8. 


87 

I2d 


1st timothy 






9, 


163 




4* 


83 








ix. 


1, 


124 


V. 


4, 


115 


i. 


2, 


226 




21, 


178 




4* 


122 




18, 


142 


X. 


1,4, 


158 




5, 


141 




18, 


148 




11, 


178 




6, 


142 


ii. 


2, 
2, 


129 
227 




28, 
29, 


217 
46 










9, 


102 


xii. 


5,7,8, 


154 


2d peter. 






9, 


108 




15, 


151 










10, 


227 




18, 


89 


i. 


8. 


181 




16. 


102 




28, 


24 




9, 


168 


T. 


«, 


128 




28, 


69 




19. 


219 




18, 


183 




28, 


101 




19. 


224 


vi. 


1,2. 


185 


xilL 


20, 


122 


it 


21. 
1. 
9. 


44 

187 
227 


%D TIMOTHT. 




JAMES. 






18, 


87 
















20. 


152 


L 


2, 


225 


i 


4, 


108 




20, 


168 




7, 


68 




4, 


110 




22, 


217 




10, 


181 




5, 


196 








ii. 


4. 
6, 


181 
115 




12, 
21, 


115 

206 









.266 INDEX. 

JUDK Chapt V. ver. 18, page 90 Ch. vii. ver. 4, page 216 









20, 


63 


viii. 


10, 


220 


i ver. 4, page 87 










10, 


223 


5. 


137 








xiL 


8, 


115 


5, 


151 


2d JOHN. 




xilL 


1, 


115 














1, 


116 






i. 


3, 


225 




u. 


79 


1st JOHN. 






7, 


145 




16, 


53 








7, 


147 


xiv. 


4, 


151 


i. 1, 


90 








XV. 


8, 


53 


ii. 13, 14. 


110 








xvl. 


», 


ITS 


16, 


131 


REVELATIONS 


. 


xvil. 


9,12, 


115 


16, 


133 








xix. 


12. 


115 


18, 


145 


i. 


5, 


217 




15, 


178 


20, 27, 


185 




10, 


44 




18, 


53 


22, 


145 




18, 


128 


xxi. 


• 1, 


95 


22, 


147 


ii. 


10, 


115 




4, 


24 


il 17, 


129 




10, 


181 




8, 


68 


22, 


196 


iiL 


4, 


151 




11, 


221 


V. 8, 


145 




5. 


131 




18, 


219 


18, 


46 




9, 


21 




18, 


222 


18, 


19 




11, 


115 


xxii. 


5, 


219 


21, 


63 




19, 


154 




5, 


820 


V. 4, 


97 


iv. 


4, 


115 








16, 


197 


vL 


10, 


187 












REDFIELD'S P JBLICATIOXJ?. — PCETUV aMJ TKK DRAMA. 



POETRY AND THE DEAMA. 

riie Works of Shakespeare, reprinted from the newly- 

discoverod copy of the Folio of 1632, in tho possession of J. Patnh 
Collier, with numerous Illustrations. One vol. Imperial 8vo. Cloth, 
$4 ; sheep, $4 25 ; half morocco, plain, $5 00 ; marble edges, $5 50 ; half 
, calf, or morocco extra, $6 00 ; full morocco, antique, $7 00. 
Same as above, cheap edition, cloth, $3 00 ; sheep, $3 50 ; imitation morocco, 
fuU gUt, $4 00. 

The Works of Shakespeare, same as above. Uniform in 
size with tho celebrated Chiswick Edition, 8 vols. 16mo, cloth, $6 00; 
half calf or morocco, plain, $10 00 ; half calf or morocco, extra, $12 00. 

Is'otes and Emendations of Shakespeare. Notes and 

Emendations to the Text of Shakespeare's Plays, from the Early Manu- 
script Con-octions in a copy of the folio of 1632, in the possession of John 
Payne Collier, F. S. A. Third edition, with a fac-simile of the Manu- 
script Corrections. 1 vol., 12mo., cloth. Price $1 50. 

Lilian, and other Poems, By Winthrop Mackwobth 
Pbaed. Now first collected. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00. 

Lays of the Scottish Cavaliers. By William E. Aytoun, 

Professor of Literature and Belles-Lettres in the Universitv of Edinburgh, 
and Editor of Blackwood's Magazine. 1 vol., 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Firrailian ; a Spasmodic Tragedy. By T. Peboy Jones 

[W. E. Aytoun]. Price 50 cents. 

The Book of Ballads. By Bon Gaultikr. 1 vol. 12mo, 

cloth. Price 75 cents. 

Poetical Works of Fitz-Greene Halleck. New and. only 

Complete Edition, containing several New Poems, together with many 
now first collected. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00. 

Simms' Poetical Works. Poems: Descriptive, Drama- 
tic, Legendary, and Contemplative. By Wm. Gilmohb Sihms. With a 
Portrait on steel. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 50. 

Lyra, and other Poeins. By Alice Carey. 1 vol., 

12mo, cloth. Price 75 cents. 

The Poetical Works of W. H. C. Hosmer. Now first 
collected. With a Portrait on steel. 2 vols., 12mo. Price $2 00. 

Scottish Songs, Ballads, and Poems. By Hrw Ainslie, 

auliior of " The Ingleside," " On with the Tar.2n," " Rover of Loch- 
Byan," &c., &c. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00. 

The Poets and Poetry of Ireland. 1 vol., 8vo, with 
Plates. Edited by Dr. R. Sublton Mackbkzib. [In Press.] 

Oliatta, and other Poems. By Howard H. Caldwell* 

12rao, cloth. Price $1 Ot 



£ RfiDFIBLD'S PUBLICATIONS. — HISTORY AM) BIOGRAPHY. 



HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY 

Ancient Egypt under the Pharaohs. By Johk Kknkiok, 

M. A. In 2 vols., 12mo. Price $2 50. 

Kewman's Kegal Kome. An Introduction to Roman 

History. By Fbanoi8 W. Newman, Professor of Latin in the University 
College, London. 12mo, cloth. Price 63 cents. 

The Catacombs of Rome, as Ulnstrating the Church of 
the First Three Centuries. By the Right Rev. W. Ikgraham Kip, D. D., 
Missionary Bishop of California. Author of " Christmas Holidays in 
Rome," " Early Conflicts of Christianity," &c., &c. With over 100 Illus- 
Ijations. 12mo, cloth. Price 75 cents. 

The History of the Crusades. By Joseph FRANgow 

MiOHAUD. Translated by W. Robson. 3 vols., 12mo, Maps. Price 
$3 75. 

Napoleon in Exile ; or, a Yoice from St. Helena. Being 
the Opinions and Reflections of Napoleon, on the most important Events 
in his Life and Government, in his own words. By Babry E. O'Mbaba, 
his late Surgeon ; with a Portrait of Napoleon, after the celebrated picture 
of Delaroche, and a view of St. Helena, both beautilully engraved on steel. 
2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 00. 

Jomini's Campaign of Waterloo. The Political and 
Military Histor^r of the Campaign of Waterloo, fiom the French of Gen 
eral Baron Jommi. By Lieut. S. V. Bbnet, U. S. Ordnance, with a Map. 
12mo, cloth. Price 75 cents. 

Napier's Peninsular War. History of the War in the 
Peninsula, and in the South of France, from the T«ar 1807 to 1814. By 
W. F. P. Napiek, C. B., Colonel 43d Regiment, &e. Complete in 1 vol, 
8vo. Price $2 50. 

Napier's Peninsular War. History of the War in the 

Peninsula, and in the South of France, from the Te»r 1807 to 1814. By 
W. F. P. Napier, C. B., Colonel 43d Regiment, ftc In 5 vols., 12mo, 
with Portraits and Plans. Price $6 25. [& Press.] 

Discovery and Exploration of the Mississippi Valley. 
With the Original Narratives of Marquette, Alloucz, Membr6, Hennepin. 
andJLnastase Donay. By Johx Gilmart Shba. With a fac-simile of 
the^riginal Map of Marquette. 1 vol., 8vo, clotii, antique. Price $2. 

Narrative of a Toyago to the Northwest Coast of Ameri- 
ca, in the Years 1811-'12- 13 anil 1814; or, the First Settlement on tha 
Pacific. By Gabriel Franclidre. Translated and Edited by J. V. Hunt* 
IITGTON. 12mo, cloth. Plates. Price $1 00. 

Las Cases' Napoleon. Memoirs of the Life, Exile, and 

Conversations of the Emperor Napoleon. By the Count Las Casbs. 
With Portraits on steel, woodcuts, &c. 4 vols., 12mo, cloth, $4 Of Ualf 
calf or morecoo extra, $8 00. 



REDFIELD'S PUBLICATIONS. — HISTORY AND BI0G11A1»IIY 



Life of the Rt. Hon. John Philpot Ciirran. By his Son, 

Wm. Henry Curran ; with Notes and Additions, by Dr. R. Shelton Mao 
KENZiE, and a Portrait on Steel. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

Sketches of the Irish Bar. By the Right Hon. Richard 
Lalor Sheil, M. P. Edited, with a Memoir and Notes, by Dr. R. Shelton 
Mackenzie. Fourth Edition. In 2 vols. Price $2 00. 

Barrington's Sketches. Personal Sketclies of his Own 
Time. B'^ Sir Jonah Barrington, Judge of the Hipjh Court of 
Admiralty in Ireland; with Illustrations by Darley. Third Edition. 
12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

Moore's Life of Sheridan. Memoirs of the Life of the 
Rt. Hon. Richard Brinsley Sheridan. By Thomas Moorb; with Por- 
trait after Sir Joshua Reynolds. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 00. 

Men of the Time, or Sketclies of Living Notables, Au- 
thors, Architects, Artists, Composers, Demagogues, Divines, Dramatists, 
Engineers, Journalists, Ministers, Monarchs, Novelists, Politicians, Poets, 
Philanthropists, Preachers, Savans, Statesmen, Travellers, Voyagers, War- 
riors. 1 vol., 12mo. Containing nearly Nine Hundred Biographical 
Sketches. Price $1 50. 

Lorenzo Benoni ; or, Passages in the Life of an Italian. 
Edited by a Friend. 1 vol., 12mo. $1 00. 

Tlie Workingman's Way 'n the World. Being the Au- 
tobiography of a Journeyman P. nter. By Charles Manbt Smith, 
Author of " Curiosities of London ^^ife.*' 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Classic and Historic Portraits. By James Brucii:. 

12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Ladies of the Covenant. Memoirs of Distinguished 
Scottish Females, embracing the Period of the Covenant and the Perse- 
cution. By Rev. Jambs Anderson. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 25. 

Tom Moore's Suppressed Letters. ITotes from the Let- 
ters of Thomas Moore to his Music-Publisher, James Power (the publica- 
tion of which was suppressed in London), with an Introductory Letter 
from Thomaa Crofton Croker, Esq., F. S. A. With four Engravings on 
steel. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 50. 

Fifty Years in Both Hemispheres; or, Reminiscences of 
a Merchant's Life. By Vincent Noltb. 12mo. Price $1 25. (Eighth 
Edition.) 

Men and Women of the Eighteenth Century. By 
Arsene Houssayb. With beautifully-engraved Portraits of Louis X v. 
and Madame de Pompadoiu*. 2 vol?., 12mo, 450 pages each, extra supers 
fine paper. Price $2 50. 

Philosophers and Actresses. By Arsene Houssate. 
With beautifully-engraved Portraits of Voltaire and Madame Parabfira 
2 vols., 12mo. Price $2 50. 

Life of the Honorable William H. Seward, with Selec- 
tions from his Works. Edited by George E. Baker. l2mo, clotk. 
Portrait. Price $1 00. 



4 UEDFIELD'S p;bLICAT10\S — III&TORY and BlOtlRAPUY 

The History of Texas, from its Settlement in 16S5 to its 
Annexation to the United States. By H. Yoakum, Esq., of the Texai 
Bar; with Pcrtraits, Maps, and Plaus. 2 vols., 8vo, cloth or sheep. 
Price $5 00. [In Press.] 

The History of Louisiana — Spanish Domination. By 

Ch^vrles Gatibrb. Syo, cloth. Price $2 50. 

The History of Louisiana — French Domination. By 

Ohablbs Gatarbe. 2 Tols., Svo, cloth. Price $3 50. 

The Life of P. T. Barnura, written by Iiimself ; in which 
he narrates his early history as Clerk, Merchant, and Editor, and his later 
career as a Showman. With a Portrait on steel, and nnmerons Illastra- 
tions by Darley. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 25. 

A Memorial of Horatio Greenough, consisting of a 

Memoir, Selections from his Writings, and Tributes to his Genius, by 
Hbnrt T. Tuckerhan, Author of " Sicily, a Pilgrimage," " A Monlh 
in England," &c., &c. 12mo, cloth. Price 75 cents. 

Minnesota and its Resources; to which are appended 

Camp-Fire Sketches, or Notes of a Trip from St. Paul to Pembina and 
Selkirk Settlements on the Red River of tne North. By J. Wesley Bond. 
With a New Map of the Territory, a View of St. Paul, and one of the 
Falls of St. Anthony. I vol., 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

The Private Life of an Easte n Kincr- By a Member of 

the Household of his Late Majesty. N^ussir-u-deen, King of Oude. 12mo^ 
cloth. Price 75 cents. 

Doran's Queens of Englpiid. Tlie Queens of England, 
of th3 House of Hanover. B^ Dr. Dorak, Author of "Tible Tnuts," 
" Ha>it8 and Men," &c. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 00 



ttEDFIELD*S PUBLICATIONS. — VOYAGES AND TRAVELS. 



VOYAGES AND TRAVELS. 

The U. S. Japan Expedition. Japan and Around the 

World. An Account of Three Visits to the Japanese Empire, with 
Sketches of Madeira, St. Helena, Cape of Grood Hope, Maoritias, Ceylon, 
Singapore, China, Loo Choo, &c., 1852 to 1855. By J. W. Spalding, 
Captain's Clerk of the Flagship "Mississippi." 1 vol., 12mo, with Dins- 
trations. Cloth. Price $1 25. 

Cosas de Espana. (Strange Things of Spain.) Going to 

Madrid via Barcelona. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

A Month in England. By Henry T. Ttjckerman, Anthoi 

of " Sicily, a Pilgrimage," " The Opthnist," &c. 12mo, cloth. Price 75 cts 

Sicily, a Pilgrimage, by Henry T. Tuckerman, Anthoi 
of "A Month in England," &c., &c. 12mo, cloth. Price 75 cents. 

A Tennessean Abroad ; or, Letters from Europe, Asia, 
' and Africa. By Bandall W. McGavock, A. M., L. L. B., Member of 
the Nashville Bar. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Life in the Mission, the Camp, and the Zenana. By Mrs. 
' Colin Mackenzie. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 OOl 

The Eussian Shores of the Black Sea, with a Yoyage 

down the "Volga, and a Tour tlirough the Country of the Cossacks. By 
Laurence Oliphant, Author of "A Journey to Nepanl." Fourth 
Edition. 12mo, cloth. Two maps and eighteen cuts. Price 75 cents. 

A Year with the Turks ; or, Sketches of Travel in the 
European and Asiatic Dominions of the Sultan. By Wabrington W. 
Smyth, A. M. With a colored Ethnological Map of the Turkish Empire. 
Third Edition. 12mo, cloth. Piice 75 cents. 

Russo-Turkish Campaigns of 1828 and 1829. Witli a 
View of the Present State of Affaurs in the East. By Colonel Chesnet, 
R. A., B. C. L., F. R. S., Autiior of the Expedition for the Survey of the 
Rivers Euphrates and Tigris. With an Appendix, containing the Diplo- 
matic Correspondence of the Four Powers, and the Secret Correspondence 
between the Russian and English Grovemments. 1 vol., 12mo, cloth; 
Maps. Price $1 €0. 

White, Ked, and Black. Sketches of American Society, 
during the Visits of their Guests. By Francis and Theresa Pdlszkt. 
2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 00. 

The Blackwater Chronicle : A Narrative of an Expedi- 
tion into the Land of Canaan, in Randolph County, Virginia, a Country 
flowing with Wild Animals, such as Panthers, Bears, Wolves, Elk, Deer, 
Otter, Badger, &c.^ &c., with innumerable Trout, by Five Adventurous 
Gentlemen, without any Aid of Government, and solely by their Own Ro« 
sources, in the Summer of 1851. Bv " The Clerke op Oxenforde." 
With Illustrations from Life by Strotlicr. 12mo, doth. Price $1 00. 



Ri!.DFlELD'S PUliLICATIONS. — SCIENCE AND ART. 



SCIENCE AND ART. 

Qriecoin on Yentilation. The Uses and Abuses of Air; 

showing its Influence in Sustaining Life, and Producing Disease, with re- 
marks on the Ventilation of Houses, and the best Methods of Securing a 
Pure and "Wholesome Atmosphere inside of Dwellings, Churches, Work- 
shops, &c. By John H. Griscom, M. D. 1 vol., 12mo. Price 75 cents. 

Bronchitis, and Kindred Diseases. In language adapted 
to common readers. By W. W. Hall, M. D. 1 vol., 12mo. Price 

$1 00. 

Bodenhamer on the Diseases of the Kectum. Practical 
Observations on some of the Diseases of the Rectum, Anus, and Continu- 
ous Textures; giving their Nature, Seat, Causes, Symptoms, Conse- 
quences, and Prevention; especially addressed to non-medical readers. 
By W. BoDBNUAMER, M. D. Second edition, with plates, &c. In 1 vol., 
8vo, cloth. Price $2 00. 

Comparative Physiognomy ; or, Resemblances between. 

Men and Animals. By J, W. Rbdfield, M. D. 1 vol., 8vo, with sev- 
eral hundred Illustrations. Price $2 00. 

Episodes of Insect Life. By Aoheta Domestioa. In 

three Series: — 1. Insects of Spring. 2. Insects of Summer. 3. Insects 
of Autumn. Beautifully Illustrated. Crown 8vo, cloth, gilt, $2 00 each. 
The same beautifully colored after Nature, extra gilt, $4 00 each. 

Narratives of Sorcery and Magic, from the most Authen- 
tic Sources. By Thomas Wright, A. M., &c. 1 vol., 12mo. Price 
$1 25. 

The Night-Side of Nature ; or, Ghosts and Ghost-Seers. 
By Catharine Cbowe. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00. 

Art and Industry, as represented in the Exhibition at tho 
Crystal Palace, New York. Showing the Progress and State of the vari- 
ous Useful and Esthetic Pursuits. IVom the " New York Tribune." Re- 
vised and Edited by Horacb Gbeblet. 12mo, cloth, fine paper, $1 00. 
Paper covers, 50 cents. 

Chapman's American Drawing-Book. The American 
Drawing-Book, intended for Schools, Academies, and Self-Instruction. 
By John G. Chapman, N. A. Three Parts now published. Pric« 
.50 cents each. [Part IV. in Press.] 

The History and Poetry of Finger-Kings. By Charles 
Edwards, Esq., Coucsellor-at-Law. With Illustratious, 12mo, dotfai 
Price «1 00. 



REDFI eld's publications. — BELLES-LETTRES. 



BELLES-LETTRES. 

Eevolutioniiry Tales, by Wm. Gilmorb Simms, Esq. New and B» 
vised Editions, with Blustratioiis by Darley. 

The Partisan ; A Eomance of the Eevolution. 12ino, 

cloth. Price $1 25. 

Mellichampe; A Legend of the Santee. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

Katharine Walton ; or, The Kebel of Dorchester. 12mo, 

cloth. Price $1 25. 

The Scout; or, The Black Eiders of the Congaree. 

12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

"Woodcraft ; or. The Hawks about the Dovecote. 12nio, 

doth. Price $1 25. 

The Foray ers; or. The Eaid of the Dog-Days. A New 

Eevolutionary Komance. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

Eutaw. A New Eevolutionary Eomance. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

Sunms's Border Romances of the South, New and Keyised Editionsv 

with Illustrations by Darley. Uniform with Simms's Revolutionaki 
Tales. 

I. Guy Eivers. A Tale of Georgia. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

n. Eichard Hurdis. A Tale of Alabama. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

III. Border Beagles. A Tale of Mississippi. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

IV. Charlemont. A Tale of Kentucky. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

V. Beauchampe; or, The Kentucky Tragedy. 12mo, 

cloth. Price $1 25. 

VI. Confession; or, The Blind Heart. 12mo, cloth. 

Price $1 25. 

Tlie Temassee; A Eomance of South Carolina. By 

Wh. Gilmosb Sihms, Esq. 12ino, doth. Price $1 25. 

Southward, Ho ! a Spell of Sunshine. By Wm. Gii> 

MOSB SiHMS, Esq. 12mo, clo&. Price $1 25. 



8 REDFIELD'S publications. — BELLES-LETTRES. 

The Xoctes Ambrosianse. By Professor Wilson, J. G. 
LocKHAUT, James Hogg, and Dr. Maginn. Edited, with Memoirs and 
Notcf , oy Dr. R. Shelton Mackenzie. In 5 volnmes. Price $5 00. 

The Odoherty Papers ; forming the first portion of the 
Miscellaneous Writings of the late Dr. Mag inn. With an Original 
Memoir, and copious Notes, by Dr. R. Shelton Mackenzie. 2 vols. 

Price $2 00. 

Tlie Shakespeare Papers, and the Homeric Ballads; 

forming Vol. III. of the Miscellaneous Writings of the late Dr. Maginn. 
Edited by Dr. R. Shelton Mackenzie. [In Press.] 

Bits of Blarney. By Dr. E. Shklton Mackenzie, 

Editor of " SheiFs Sketches of the Irish Bar," " Noctes Ambrosian»," 
&c. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Table Traits. By Dr. Doran, Author of "Habits and 

Men," &c. 12mo, cloth. $1 25. 

Habits and Men. By Dr. Doran, Author of "Table 
Traits," " The Queens of England under the House of Hanover." 12mo, 
Price $1 00. 

Calavar; The Knight of the Conquest. A Romance of 

Mexico. By the late Dr. Robert Montgomery Bird, Author of 
" Nick of the Woods ;" with Illustrations by Darlcy. I2mo, cloth Price 
$1 25. 

Nick of the Woods, or the Jibbenainosay. A Tale of 
Kentucky. By the late Dr. Robert Montgomery Bird, Author of 
" Calavar," " The Infidel," &c. New and Revised Edition, with Ulustra- 

^ tions by Darley. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

The Pretty Plate ; A New and Beautiful Juvenile. By 
John Vincent. Illustrated by Darley. 1 vol., 16mo, cloth, gilt. Price 
50 cents; extra gilt edges, 75 cents. 

Vasconselos. A Komance of the New World. By 
Frank Cooper. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

A Stray Yankee in Texas. By Philip Paxton. With 

Illustrations by Darley. Second Edition. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 25. 

The Wonderful Adventures of Capt. Priest. By Philip 
Paxton. With Illustrations by Darley. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Western Characters ; being Types of Border Life in the 
Western States. By J. L. M'Connel, Author of " Talbot and Vernon," 
" The Glenns," &c., &c With Six Illustrations by Darley. 12mo, dodi. 
Price $1 25. 

The Master-Bnilder ; or, Life at a Trade. By Day Kel- 
logg Lee. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00. 

Merrimack ; or, Life at the Loom. By Day Xellooo 

Lee. 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 00 



REDFIELD'S PUBLICATIONS. — BELLES-LETtRES. 9 

The Works of Edgar Allan Poe. Complete in three vol- 
umes. With a Portrait a Memoir by James Russell Lowell ; and an 
Introductory Essay by N P. Willis. Edited by Rufus W. Gbiswold 
12mo. Price $3 50. 

The Cavaliers of England ; or, The Times of the Eevolu- 
tions of 1642 and 1688. ByHENET William Herbbbt. 1 voL, 12mo. 
Price $1 25. 

Knights of England, France, and Scotland. By Henbv 

William Hebbebt.' 1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 25. 

The Chevaliers of France, from the Crusaders to the 
Mareschals of Louis XIV. By Hbnby William Hebbebt. Author 
of " The Cavaliers of Ei^land/' "Cromwell/* " The Brothers," &c., &c. 
1 vol., 12mo. Price $1 25. 

Marmadnke Wyvil; An Historical Romance of 1651. 
By Hbnbt William Hebbebt, Author of " The Cavaliers of England," 
&c., &c. Fourteenth Edition. Revised and Corrected. Price $1 25. 

The Forest. By J. V. Huntington, Author of ''Lady 

Alice," "Alban,"|c. 1 vol., 12mo. Second Edition. Price $1 25. 

Alban; or, The History of a Young Puritan. By J. 
V. Huntington. 2 vols., 12mo, cloth. Price $2 00. 

Isa: a Pilgrimage. By Caroline Chesebro'. 1 vol., 
12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

The Children of Light. By Caroline Chesebro', Author 

of "Isa, a Pilgrimage," "Dream-Land by Daylight," &c.^ &c. 12mo, 
cloth. Price $1 00. 

Dream-Land by Daylight: A Panorama of liomance. 

By Caboline Chesebbo'. Illustrated by Darley. 1 vol., 12mo. Price 
$1 25. 

Clovemook ; or, EecoUections of Our Neighborliood in 
the West. By Alice Cabby. Illustrated by Darley. First and Second 
Series. Fourth Edition. 2 vols. 12mo. Price $2 00. 

Hagar ; A Story of To-Day. By Alice Carey, Author 

of " Clovemook," "Lyra, and Other Poems," &c. 1 vol., 12mo. Price 
$100. 

Cap-Sheaf, a Fresh Bundle. By Lewis Myrtle. 1 vol., 

12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Tlie Youth of JeflFerson; or, A Chronicle of College 

Scrapes at Williamsburg, Va., 1764. Cloth. Price 75 cents. 

Tales and Traditions of Hungary. By Theresa Pulszky. 
With a Portrait of the Author. 1 vol. Price $1 25. 

The Lion Skin and the Lover Hunt. By Charles dh 
Bbbkabd. 12mo. Price $1 00. 

Easy Warren and his Coteniporaries: Sketched tor 
H^me Circles Bv William Tubner CoooEsnALL. Price $1 oo. 



10 REDFIELD'S PUBLICATIONS. — BELLES-LETTRES. 

Ton Have heard of Them : being Sketches of Statesmen 

and Politiciaiis, Piunters, (Composers, Instrnmentalists and Yocalists, Aa< 
thors and Authoresses. By Q. With Portraits on Steel of Horace Veiv 
net and Julia Grisi. 12nio, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Satire and Satirists. By James Hannay. 12mo, cloth 

Price 75 cents. 

Full Proof of the Ministry. By the Eev. John N. Nob- 
ton. 12mo, doth. Price 75 cents. 

SiokenB's Little Folks, in a Series of ISmo Yolomes, with Illustrations, 
Neatly Bound in Cloth. Price 38 cents. 

1. Little Nell. 4. Florence Dombey. 

2. Oliver and the Jew Fagin. 5. Smike. 

3. Little Paul. 6. The Child Wife. 

This is a series of volumes which has been undertaken with a view to supply 
the want of a class of books for children, of a vigorous, manly tone, combm^^ 
with a plain and concise mode of narration. The writings of Charles Dickens 
have been selected as the basis of the scheme, on account of the well-known 
excellence of his portraval of children, and the interesti connected with chil- 
dren—qualities which have given his volumes their strongest hold on the 
hearts of parents. With this view the career of Little Nell and her 
Gbandfathbr, Olivbb, Little Paul, Florence Dombet, Smike, and 
the Child- Wife, have been detached from the large mass of matter with 
which they were originally connected, and presented, in the author's own Urn- 
gtutge, to a new class of readers, to whom the little volume will, we doubt 
not, be as attractive as the larger originals have so long proved to the general 
public. 









10 REDFIELD'S publications. — BELLES-LETTRES. 

Ton Have heard of Them : being Sketches of Statesmen 

and Politicians, Painters, Composers, Instrumentalists and Vocalists^ Aa« 
thors and Authoresses. By Q. With Portraits on Steel of Horace Veiv 
net and Julia Grisi. 12mo, cloth. Price $1 00. 

Satire and Satirists. By James Hannay. 12mo, cloth 

Price 75 cents. 

Full Proof of the Ministry. By the Eev. John N. Nob- 
ton. 12mo, doth. Price 75 cents. 

DiokenB's Little Folks, in a Series of ISmo Yolomes, with Illustrations, 
Neatly Bound in Cloth. Price 38 cents. 

1. Little Nell. 4. Florence Dombey. 

2. Oliver and the Jew Fagin. 5. Smike. 

3. Little Paul. 6. The Child Wife. 

This is a series of volumes which has been undertaken with a view to supply 
the want of a class of books for children, of a vigorous, manly tone, combined 
with a plain and concise mode of narration. The writings of Charles Dickens 
have been selected as the basis of the scheme, on account of the well-known 
excellence of his portrayal of children, and the interesti connected with chil- 
dren—qualities which have given his volumes their strongest hold on the 
hearts of parents. With this view the career of Little Nell and her 
Grandfather, Oliver, Little Paul, Florence Dombey, Smike, and 
the Child-Wife, have been detached from the large mass of matter with 
which they were originally connected, and presented, in the author's own Ian- 
guage, to a new class of readers, to whom the little volume will, we doubt 
not, be as attractive as the larger originals have so long proved to the general 
public. 



i:::: 



"•- :% 






?*..-.: 



UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return to desk from which horrowed. 
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 



FEB 161948 






REC'D LI 
JUN2 



'D LD 

•64-12.M 



LD 31-100m-9/47(A5t0aBia)4TS 



11. 



yY 



YB 277; 9 



StfS^ 



^ 



Tf r